aminghadersohi commented on PR #44152: URL: https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/44152#issuecomment-5771948494
Follow-up on the “Uncaught pydantic ValidationError” suggestion in [review run e5f050](https://github.com/apache/superset/pull/44152#pullrequestreview-5179227336): the suggested extra exception type is unnecessary. Pydantic v2's `ValidationError` subclasses `ValueError`, so the existing `except ValueError` around `resolve_treemap_update_config` already returns the structured validation error. Commit b9d213c4d4ce9e6b5d03c6ea3e706caf7a41d799 already added `test_resolution_validation_error_is_caught_value_error`, which triggers a real invalid Treemap configuration and asserts that the resulting Pydantic exception is a `ValueError`. I reran it as part of the focused chart tests after merging master: 382 passed, 2 skipped. The installed Pydantic 2.13.4 also confirms that inheritance. No additional exception handler is needed. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
