BUG: Unable to use dot notation to access fields after upgrading to 4.7.2.

[m3thom]

Previously, on 4.7.0.pre.rc3, I could use dot notation to access fields just fine, but after upgrading to version 4.7.2, I can no longer use dot notation.
After I looked into the source code, there was no change to method_missing or respond_to_missing?.

Not sure what the source of this issue is.

Here is some example according to the document. https://docs.mindee.com/integrations/client-libraries-sdk/quick-start#ruby

# ruby 3.4.4
require 'mindee' # 4.7.2

input_path = '/path/to/the/file.ext'
api_key = 'MY_API_KEY'
model_id = 'MY_MODEL_ID'

# Init a new client
mindee_client = Mindee::ClientV2.new(api_key: api_key)

# Set inference parameters
inference_params = Mindee::Input::InferenceParameters.new(
    # ID of the model, required.
    model_id,
)

# Load a file from disk
input_source = Mindee::Input::Source::PathInputSource.new(input_path)

# Send for processing using polling
response = mindee_client.enqueue_and_get_inference(
    input_source,
    inference_params 
)

# Print a brief summary of the parsed data
puts response.inference.result.fields.supplier_address # 4.7.0.pre.rc3 works

puts response.inference.result.fields.supplier_address
#=> 4.7.2 NoMethodError: undefined method 'supplier_name' for an instance of Mindee::Parsing::V2::Field::InferenceFields (NoMethodError)
puts response.inference.result.fields.get('supplier_address')
#=> 4.7.2 works but my code base is using dot notation

Thank you !

[sebastianMindee]

Hello, thank you for for the feedback.

This is by design, as we want to uniformize usage across our other SDKs, and also to avoid some issues otherwise.
More details in #206.

That said, it is not totally out of the question to re-implement them.
We will have an internal discussion on the matter soon.

[m3thom]

Hello, thank you for your reply.
I just saw the document https://docs.mindee.com/integrations/client-libraries-sdk/process-result-fields#simplefield-single-value-field on how to access the result fields. So the recommendation is something like this?

  fields = response.inference.result.fields
  simple_field = fields.get_simple_field('my_simple_field')
  simple_field.value
  simple_field.confidence.value

I’m happy to migrate to the new method, but it would be helpful to show this in the Quick Start example code or include a reference link, so people can know how to retrieve the fields or see any changes. At least for users like me xD.

Thank you for you consideration.

[ianardee]

Hello, thank you for your reply. I just saw the document https://docs.mindee.com/integrations/client-libraries-sdk/process-result-fields#simplefield-single-value-field on how to access the result fields. So the recommendation is something like this?

fields = response.inference.result.fields
simple_field = fields.get_simple_field('my_simple_field')
simple_field.value
simple_field.confidence.value

I’m happy to migrate to the new method, but it would be helpful to show this in the Quick Start example code or include a reference link, so people can know how to retrieve the fields or see any changes. At least for users like me xD.

Thank you for you consideration.

Hi,

Yes simple_field = fields.get_simple_field('my_simple_field') is the recommended pattern for accessing fields.

This is in part to allow proper typing via RBS. Dot notation has been removed as in some cases field names conflict with built-in methods/properties.

Concerning examples and documentation, we have some information on the quickstart page here:
https://docs.mindee.com/integrations/client-libraries-sdk/quick-start#processing-the-results

And in more detail in the Process Results doc page as you mentioned.

Please let me know how to make this easier to use and understand in the documentation and I will make the needed changes.

Thanks much

[m3thom]

Hello,
Thank you for your reply. I will migrate to using the new methods to access fields in my application.

With the additional details in the Process Results, it’s now much easier to get started.

I will close this issue then.

Thank you, everyone!