You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thanks for opening your first issue here! We'll come back to you as soon as we can.
In the meantime, check out the #python channel on our Powertools for AWS Lambda Discord: Invite link
Hello @adriantomas! I totally agree that response() should have the same response type as process_partial_response(). When we refactored the Batch Process utility with the new process_partial_response() function, we created this type to make it easier for clients to access the properties of this response and we forget to annotate response() function, sorry for that 😞.
Why is this needed?
This method https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-python/blob/develop/aws_lambda_powertools/utilities/batch/base.py#L256 and https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-python/blob/024c3f2ed8858643a2d303e5c3928aa58e168c7c/aws_lambda_powertools/utilities/batch/decorators.py#L128C16-L128C16
Should have the same response typing
powertools-lambda-python/aws_lambda_powertools/utilities/batch/types.py
Line 32 in 024c3f2
So that users can easily guess that using one method or another produces the same output.
Which area does this relate to?
Static typing
Suggestion
I can submit a PR with the changes.
Acknowledgment
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: