Jan Dubský

I believe that current form of `Params` struct is sufficient to represent this, so I haven't mentioned the `Params` struct format at all in my initial description. As you say,...

Let me explain my reasoning for numbers in more details: I specify `type: number` in my swagger specification. Let's for simplicity assume that I have also used `format: int64`, so...

I'd say that changing the params struct wouldn't be an optimal solution at all. As it would bring some inconsistency in the code. I believe that empty string shouldn't be...

There is not lack of consistency in my proposal, as empty string is not a valid integer. So you will never get into a state when you need to fill...

What I say is following: My swagger specs: ``` yaml /foo: post: parameters: - in: query name: n type: number responses: 200: description: dummy desc ``` Calls: - `foo?n=1`: Params...

Yes, this is possible. I personally do not feel that references to `unsafe` are something wrong, but if somebody feels like that, we can do this change. A nice consequence...