This is related to #412.

Do we care about the depth of a transformed node changing? Only asking because the existing tests pass using the batched transform. I wrote a test case that isn't supported by this change.

def test_switching_depth(self):
    class BoxedNumberTransformer(Transform):
        def transform_number(self, o, key=None):
            return {"num": o}

    class NumberToStringTransformer(Transform):
        def transform_number(self, o, key=None):
            return str(o)

    input = ("hello", {"there": 0})

    got = transform(
        input,
        [BoxedNumberTransformer(), NumberToStringTransformer()],
        batch_transforms=True,
    )

    self.assertEqual(got, ("hello", {"there": {"num": "0"}}))

I'm trying to get a nested traverse call to work but its seeming a little complicated.

This pull request has been linked to Shortcut Story #123195: pyrollbar: resource usage problems.

Do we care about the depth of a transformed node changing? Only asking because the existing tests pass using the batched transform. I wrote a test case that isn't supported by this change.

I feel like this is probably okay, but interested on @danielmorell's take on it. I feel like the behavior shown is what I would actually expect but perhaps I am wrong.

Do we care about the depth of a transformed node changing? Only asking because the existing tests pass using the batched transform. I wrote a test case that isn't supported by this change.

@ijsnow If I understand correctly, the test you show is failing with the changes in this PR?

I was able to do some profiling and performance testing. Initially this does not look a lot different from the numbers I was seeing before. but I need to make sure that I'm not messing it up somehow.

@danielmorell

@ijsnow If I understand correctly, the test you show is failing with the changes in this PR?

Yes and it looks like a test that should pass, however if I ensure that the change is used by all usages in the tests, all the existing tests pass, which is the only reason I'm asking if it is intended to be supported.

Do we have any way of knowing how many custom transforms are in use in the wild? I'm giving it another quick pass to try to get that test to work but since its behind a flag in the settings maybe we could just document that caveat, if it indeed does help with performance.