Skip to content

fix: use default_factory for mutable field defaults in ServerCallContext#744

Open
greysonlalonde wants to merge 1 commit intoa2aproject:mainfrom
greysonlalonde:gl/fix/context-default-factory
Open

fix: use default_factory for mutable field defaults in ServerCallContext#744
greysonlalonde wants to merge 1 commit intoa2aproject:mainfrom
greysonlalonde:gl/fix/context-default-factory

Conversation

@greysonlalonde
Copy link

summary

  • replace default={} and default=UnauthenticatedUser() with default_factory=dict and default_factory=UnauthenticatedUser in ServerCallContext to prevent shared mutable default instances across all instances.

@greysonlalonde greysonlalonde requested a review from a team as a code owner February 27, 2026 04:40
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a common pitfall in Python regarding mutable default arguments. By switching to default_factory for specific fields within the ServerCallContext class, it guarantees that new, distinct objects are created for each instance, thereby enhancing the reliability and predictability of the application's state management.

Highlights

  • Mutable Default Arguments: Replaced direct assignment of mutable default objects ({} and UnauthenticatedUser()) with default_factory for state and user fields in ServerCallContext.
  • Prevented Shared Instances: The change ensures that each instance of ServerCallContext receives its own unique state dictionary and User object, preventing unintended sharing and modification across instances.
Changelog
  • src/a2a/server/context.py
    • Updated state field to use default_factory=dict instead of default={}.
    • Updated user field to use default_factory=UnauthenticatedUser instead of default=UnauthenticatedUser().
Activity
  • No activity has been recorded for this pull request yet.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This change correctly resolves an issue with mutable default arguments for the state and user fields in ServerCallContext. By using default_factory, you ensure that each model instance receives a new, unique object, preventing unintended side effects from shared state. This is a solid fix that aligns with best practices. To further improve the robustness of the code and prevent future regressions, I recommend adding a unit test that asserts two separate instances of ServerCallContext have distinct state and user objects.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant