[typescript-fetch] to fix incorrect parsing with additional properties by DavidGrath · Pull Request #20923 · OpenAPITools/openapi-generator

DavidGrath · 2025-03-18T21:14:18Z

Added test givenObjectHasAdditionalPropertiesWhenGenerateThenIndexSignatureNotUsedToGenerateMethodName to verify that it works. Also opened the newly generated folder in VSCode and found no syntax errors.
@joscha please help review

to close #20195

PR checklist

Read the contribution guidelines.
Pull Request title clearly describes the work in the pull request and Pull Request description provides details about how to validate the work. Missing information here may result in delayed response from the community.
Run the following to build the project and update samples:
```
./mvnw clean package || exit
./bin/generate-samples.sh ./bin/configs/*.yaml || exit
./bin/utils/export_docs_generators.sh || exit
```
(For Windows users, please run the script in Git BASH)
Commit all changed files.
This is important, as CI jobs will verify all generator outputs of your HEAD commit as it would merge with master.
These must match the expectations made by your contribution.
You may regenerate an individual generator by passing the relevant config(s) as an argument to the script, for example ./bin/generate-samples.sh bin/configs/java*.
IMPORTANT: Do NOT purge/delete any folders/files (e.g. tests) when regenerating the samples as manually written tests may be removed.
File the PR against the correct branch: master (upcoming 7.x.0 minor release - breaking changes with fallbacks), 8.0.x (breaking changes without fallbacks)
If your PR is targeting a particular programming language, @mention the technical committee members, so they are more likely to review the pull request.

joscha · 2025-03-19T00:05:09Z

refs #20195

joscha

🎉

joscha · 2025-03-19T00:04:11Z

docs/generators/fsharp-functions.md

 |sortModelPropertiesByRequiredFlag|Sort model properties to place required parameters before optional parameters.| |true|
 |sortParamsByRequiredFlag|Sort method arguments to place required parameters before optional parameters.| |true|
-|sourceFolder|source folder for generated code| |OpenAPI/src|
+|sourceFolder|source folder for generated code| |OpenAPI\src|


We should revert these - probably because regeneration was done on windows?

Hello, thank you for the feedback.
I also think it was because of Windows. I'll try using a Linux machine instead to effectively undo my own changes

you can use WSL instead

Thank you. Done

you can use WSL instead

joscha · 2025-03-19T00:06:24Z

modules/openapi-generator/src/main/resources/typescript-fetch/apis.mustache

            {{^isEnumRef}}
            {{^withoutRuntimeChecks}}
-            formParams.append('{{baseName}}', new Blob([JSON.stringify({{{dataType}}}ToJSON(requestParameters['{{paramName}}']))], { type: "application/json", }));
+            formParams.append('{{baseName}}', new Blob([JSON.stringify({{returnType}}ToJSON(requestParameters['{{paramName}}']))], { type: "application/json", }));


can we add a fixture (generated sample) to the repository that shows this change? Or have the samples not been regenerated?

I think the only real changes I got from running generate-samples were CRLF/LF changes.
Tried again recently and this is pretty much all the output:

@joscha Okay, so I retried on WSL and it seems the package-lock.json was the only real change

DavidGrath · 2025-03-22T05:07:36Z

Good Day @joscha ,
Do you think it's good to go now?

joscha

Nice. Will need @macjohnny to merge.

paras-fundwave · 2025-07-09T12:47:39Z

modules/openapi-generator/src/main/resources/typescript-fetch/apis.mustache

            {{^isEnumRef}}
            {{^withoutRuntimeChecks}}
-            formParams.append('{{baseName}}', new Blob([JSON.stringify({{{dataType}}}ToJSON(requestParameters['{{paramName}}']))], { type: "application/json", }));
+            formParams.append('{{baseName}}', new Blob([JSON.stringify({{returnType}}ToJSON(requestParameters['{{paramName}}']))], { type: "application/json", }));


this seems to be only working when additionalProperties exists

it is causing an issue where the param (paramName here) has it's own schema

for the case shown below, it puts in RequestPayload but instead it should be RequestContext

e.g.

requestBody: description: entity for which custom field will be added such as fund, deal, asset, investor etc content: multipart/form-data: schema: $ref: "#/components/schemas/RequestPayload" ... RequestPayload: type: object properties: context: $ref: "#/components/schemas/RequestContext" ... RequestContext: type: object properties: ...

@macjohnny @joscha

@paras-fundwave thanks for reporting! would you want to send a PR to fix that?

sure thing!

while I'll familiarise myself with the codebase, can you help confirm the approach I have in mind

we'll need to have 2 outputs (for this line) depending on whether additionalProperties exists

from this PR I can see I'll need to add test-cases too, anything else I'm missing that can help but might not be mentioned in the contributing.md?

sg, no objections, although i didnt look into the issue in detail

looks like how datatype is processed has changed too in b/w v7.0.0 and v7.1.0

reverting to dataType is still leads to malformed code - broken v7.1.0 onwards

Ah, I see. It seems like an inverted mustache section might come in handy. Were you able to spot any other issues around this? Thanks for pointing this out

Seeing similar issues on 7.14.0 with a discriminated schema where returnType is null and ends up generating invalid code: new Blob([JSON.stringify(ToJSON(...)], ...), dataType generates as expected with new Blob([JSON.stringify(MyDiscriminatedSchemaToJSON(...)], ...)

7.12.0 generates OK, 7.13.0 onwards is broken.

I haven't read up on the original issue fully -- but as the line in question is part of building up the request, using the return type for serializing request parameters seems wrong?

Diving into the test I don't think the assertion is right.

The schema for the request body is:

"multipart/form-data": { "schema": { "type": "object", "properties": { "paRes": { "type": "object", "additionalProperties": { "type": "string" }, "description": "Form sent for Authentication" } } }, "encoding": { "paRes": { "style": "form" } } }

ResponseOfString is a schema used as the response:

"responses": { "200": { "description": "OK", "content": { "application/json": { "schema": { "$ref": "#/components/schemas/ResponseOfString" } } } } }

The code that gets generated to append the part for the form in the request:

if (requestParameters['paRes'] != null) { formParams.append('paRes', new Blob([JSON.stringify(ResponseOfStringToJSON(requestParameters['paRes']))], { type: "application/json", })); }

But that is surely wrong, as ResponseOfString is the response of the operation, not related to the request body?

I have raised a PR to revert: #21542 (FYI @macjohnny)

…roperties (OpenAPITools#20923)" This reverts commit 0becb3f.

…roperties (#20923)" (#21542) This reverts commit 0becb3f. Co-authored-by: Adrian Hjertstedt <ahjertstedt@ldms.com>

DavidGrath added 2 commits March 18, 2025 21:45

Fix issue OpenAPITools#20195

e950e2c

Ran export_docs_generators.sh

4c82037

joscha reviewed Mar 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

DavidGrath added 2 commits March 19, 2025 18:10

Generated path separators fixed

0d6041f

Trigger Build

3207c6b

joscha approved these changes Mar 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

wing328 changed the title ~~Fix issue #20195~~ [typescript-fetch] to fix incorrect parsing with additional properties Mar 23, 2025

wing328 added Client: TypeScript Issue: Bug labels Mar 23, 2025

wing328 added this to the 7.13.0 milestone Mar 23, 2025

macjohnny merged commit 0becb3f into OpenAPITools:master Mar 24, 2025
15 checks passed

paras-fundwave reviewed Jul 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

adrianhj pushed a commit to adrianhj/openapi-generator that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2025

Revert "[typescript-fetch] to fix incorrect parsing with additional p…

5b5f63a

…roperties (OpenAPITools#20923)" This reverts commit 0becb3f.

adrianhj mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2025

Revert "[typescript-fetch] to fix incorrect parsing with additional p… #21542

Merged

macjohnny pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2025

Revert "[typescript-fetch] to fix incorrect parsing with additional p…

65cb95b

…roperties (#20923)" (#21542) This reverts commit 0becb3f. Co-authored-by: Adrian Hjertstedt <ahjertstedt@ldms.com>

madpah mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2025

[BUG][typescript-fetch] Objects as FormParams generate invalid code (missing type before ToJSON) #21670

Closed

6 tasks

sermler mentioned this pull request Dec 22, 2025

[BUG][typescript-fetch] Additional-Properties/Collections in Multipart-Requests #22568

Open

6 tasks

Uh oh!

Conversation

DavidGrath commented Mar 18, 2025 • edited by wing328 Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

PR checklist

Uh oh!

joscha commented Mar 19, 2025

Uh oh!

joscha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DavidGrath commented Mar 22, 2025

Uh oh!

joscha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

paras-fundwave Jul 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

adrianhj Jul 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

adrianhj Jul 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

DavidGrath commented Mar 18, 2025 •

edited by wing328

Loading

paras-fundwave Jul 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

adrianhj Jul 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

adrianhj Jul 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading