David Montague

I see, that's useful context. Given this, are you uninterested in the feature as implemented above? The `Depends`-replacement capability (as implemented above) seems like it could be interesting/useful even without...

That sounds good to me. I would be on-board with it accepting arbitrary (jinja) templates, but shipping with one or more, including *at least* pydantic. I think handling APIs is...

@koxudaxi Here's my tentative breakdown of the steps we'll need to cover (probably in this order): 1. APIs-generation works and generates valid files assuming the models are imported (but requires...

@koxudaxi that import management is pretty cool! However, I am concerned about cyclic schema-references (at least with pydantic), which can happen even in cases where there are no cyclic object...

Separately, I spent some time reading through the datamodel-code-generator code, and I'm having a little bit of a hard time understanding everything it is doing -- it seems very abstract...

I have thought some more about it. You can take a look at the fastapi_client repo. (Feel free to fork or whatever if you want to use the code.) There...

Hi @nyejon, I do think this could be a good fit. The most important thing for me would be that it feels generic/reusable as opposed to targeting a more domain-specific...

Also, something to think about -- does this have any relationship to generic CBVs as described in #2 and #3? If practical usage and/or implementation would benefit from the existence...

For what it's worth, I'm fine with providing *specializations* that require additional dependencies. I would just prefer to offer a simpler version if it can provide other benefits. I also...

Very much open to it if someone wants to put in the effort!