CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging#10453 willnot alter performance

_{Comparingsantibreo:patch-1 (5c253e0) withmain (e301d4a)}

Summary

✅ 38 untouched benchmarks

Coverage report

This PR does not seem to contain any modification to coverable code.

Hi! Thanks for the contribution.

I believe this takes place afterall validation, so perhaps it'd be better to specify that instead? Not narrow down to just field validators?

Hi, thanks for your comment. As far as I discovered (you can check in the gist) themodel_validator(..., mode='after')takes place aftermodel_post_init. That was causing my confusion. I think it is a natural guess:__init__ ➡️ model validation before ➡️ field validation before ➡️ field validation after ➡️ model validation after ➡️model post init. But the end is: ... ➡️model_post_init ➡️ model validation after.

@santibreo,

Thanks for following up! Ah yes, now I recall, we inject different functional validators at different points in the core schema.

Perhaps it's best to document this pattern somewhere explicitly (inconcepts/validators) maybe, rather than just a docstring update here?

Also, happy to accept this PR and I can work on that docs PR. Lmk if you're still interested in more docs updates here!

Hi!. I agree it would be better to include a more in-depth explanation inconcepts/validators. I think you can keep using this PR or you can close it linked to the new one. Either case works for me.
Thank you!

Going to go ahead and merge as is, I think my lingering concerns can be addressed with#8277