short-circuit | Example of the circuit breaker pattern in Python

I have this simple code block

Consider the following code:

I've just started learning Python. I saw an interesting code from here that the author used to explain short-circuiting. The code is as follows:

I have generic framework code that validates incoming requests using Yup with stripUnknown: true so that excess fields are removed. However, I have one place where I explicitly want to allow any JSON object as input.

How can I explicitly allow one object within a schema to have any fields while otherwise using stripUnknown: true?

Things I've considered but haven't figured out how to implement:

• Use yup.object().test(...) or similar to explicitly allow the object
• Use yup.addMethod to add a method to yup.object() which would short-circuit the stripping
• Use yup.lazy to generate a schema which allows anything (but the type should allow nested JSON, not only top-level fields)
• Add a new top-level type yup.anyObject() which would allow any object

Sandbox example

I want to

1. generate a list of matching files
2. know if at least one of the patterns matched

The following will not work if there are any pdf files because then the first compgen will return true and the second compgen will not be executed.

I have a unit test class where my unit under test is dependent on another class. The dependency is mocked using Mockito and then setup with a generic stub that's run before every unit test, using JUnit's @BeforeEach annotation. See the below pseudo-code.

Does the new C++20 spaceship operator allow a concise way of expressing short-circuited multiple-criteria comparison? Something better than this:

Reading this blog post – https://www.haskellforall.com/2021/05/the-trick-to-avoid-deeply-nested-error.html – I realised I don't understand why the 'trick' actually works in this situation:

The C and C++ languages evaluate || and && in left-to-right order, and must "short-circuit" the right-hand side if the left-hand side establishes the truth value of the entire expression.

Does either language allow for the generated code to not call foo(), if the result of foo() is stored in a local variable only used on the right-hand-side of a short-circuit operator?

In the example below, the generated code for bar() must emit a call to foo(). When compiling baz(), could a conformant optimizing compiler remove the invocation of foo() since x is known at compile-time?