Bug: Fields items are serialized more than once by fields.Method

[benedekh]

After fixing #1993 in #1994, I stumbled upon another bug. List items are serialized more than once by fields.Method. To reproduce the bug, let's have the following Schema:

class ExampleSchema(Schema):
	dummy_list = fields.List(fields.Method(serialize="serialize_me"))

	def serialize_me(self, obj):
		return [str(value) for value in obj["dummy_list"]]

Let's have the following serialization code:

obj = {"dummy_list": ["hello", "world"]}
dumped = ExampleSchema().dump(obj)

After serialization dumped will be

{"dummy_list": [["hello", "world"], ["hello", "world"]]}

instead of

{"dummy_list": ["hello", "world"]}

The cause of the problem is, the serialize_me method never receives the value that should be serialized (neither as an argument, nor in **kwargs), it only gets the obj that is being serialized. By looking at the source code here, we see that the _serialize_method of fields.Method does not get the value as parameter.

---

Although the fix seems to be quite simple, just pass the value to the _serialize_method, it would be a breaking API change that would need a new major release.

To avoid a new major release, I would like to ask the maintainer(s) of the repository if they see any other solution to fix this bug?

[lafrech]

I'd say the error lies in container fields such as List field.

    def _serialize(self, value, attr, obj, **kwargs) -> list[typing.Any] | None:
        if value is None:
            return None
        return [self.inner._serialize(each, attr, obj, **kwargs) for each in value]

When serializing a list, obj is the object, attr the name of the attribute holding the list and value the content of that attribute (the elements in the list). Then we call the inner field serialize method on each element, and we pass attr and obj which doesn't make much sense considering that at this stage it is supposed to work on a single element, with no knowledge about the list. We can't really make up an attr and an obj that make sense here.

This is related to #2039.

I don't see a nice solution to this. In fact, what I say in #2039 is that we shouldn't pass attr and an obj but this would break Function and Method field and I have no idea how to make those fields work without passing the object.

Thanks for adding another example of why this design is wrong, but I can't think of a better implementation.

(Sorry I didn't get the time to further look into #1993 and #1994.)