Fix structlog handling of dict arguments in logging calls

[SakshamSinghal20]

Description

Fixes #62201: structlog configuration fails with dict input

When a dictionary is passed as a positional argument to a logging message
(e.g., logging.getLogger(__name__).warning('Info message %s', {'a': 10})),
Airflow's structlog processor incorrectly treats the dict as structured context
instead of a value for string interpolation, causing a crash.

This fix modifies the structlog processor to convert dict arguments to their
string representation before processing, ensuring backward compatibility with
existing structured logging functionality.

Changes Made

• Modified structlog processor in airflow/utils/log/ to handle dict arguments
• Added type conversion for positional arguments containing dictionaries
• Ensured backward compatibility with existing structured logging (kwargs)

Testing

• Verified fix with reproduction script: logging.getLogger(__name__).warning('Info message %s', {'a': 10})
• Tested with nested dictionaries, empty dictionaries, and various data types
• Confirmed no regression in existing logging functionality

Related Issues

• closes: structlog configuration fails with dict input #62201

---

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

• Yes (used for understanding the issue and analyzing the logic)

[amoghrajesh]

Looking at this more closely, this is not a valid way of logging dictionaries.

Since we use underneath stdlib logging, it will crash which is expected. Running this:

import logging

logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG)
logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)

logger.warning("Info message %s", {"a": 10})

would crash too. The right way to log a dict would be: logger.warning("Info message %s", str({"a": 10}))

[SakshamSinghal20]

Looking at this more closely, this is not a valid way of logging dictionaries.

Since we use underneath stdlib logging, it will crash which is expected. Running this:

import logging

logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG)
logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)

logger.warning("Info message %s", {"a": 10})

would crash too. The right way to log a dict would be: logger.warning("Info message %s", str({"a": 10}))

Thank You @amoghrajesh for letting me know I will change this ASAP.

[anyapriya]

Looking at this more closely, this is not a valid way of logging dictionaries.

Since we use underneath stdlib logging, it will crash which is expected. Running this:

import logging

logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG)
logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)

logger.warning("Info message %s", {"a": 10})

would crash too. The right way to log a dict would be: logger.warning("Info message %s", str({"a": 10}))

@amoghrajesh Wait, I'm a little confused. You're saying this example should fail, but it doesn't seem to when I test it out, screenshot below. Would be curious if it's a version difference, or if I'm misunderstanding.

[SakshamSinghal20]

@amoghrajesh I’ve addressed your feedback and pushed the necessary changes. Could you please review it again when you get a chance?

[SakshamSinghal20]

@potiuk Would you like to look at this once and tell if everything is correctly implemented or not?

[jscheffl]

@SakshamSinghal20 This PR has a few issues that need to be addressed before it can be reviewed — please see our Pull Request quality criteria.

Issues found:

• ❌ Merge conflicts: This PR has merge conflicts with the main branch. Your branch is 722 commits behind main. Please rebase your branch (git fetch origin && git rebase origin/main), resolve the conflicts, and push again. See contributing quick start.

Note: Your branch is 722 commits behind main. Some check failures may be caused by changes in the base branch rather than by your PR. Please rebase your branch and push again to get up-to-date CI results.

What to do next:

• The comment informs you what you need to do.
• Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
• Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.

Please address the issues above and push again. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.

[potiuk]

@SakshamSinghal20 This PR has been converted to draft because it does not yet meet our Pull Request quality criteria.

Issues found:

• ❌ Merge conflicts: This PR has merge conflicts with the main branch. Your branch is 1185 commits behind main. Please rebase your branch (git fetch origin && git rebase origin/main), resolve the conflicts, and push again. See contributing quick start.

Note: Your branch is 1185 commits behind main. Some check failures may be caused by changes in the base branch rather than by your PR. Please rebase your branch and push again to get up-to-date CI results.

What to do next:

• The comment informs you what you need to do.
• Fix each issue, then mark the PR as "Ready for review" in the GitHub UI - but only after making sure that all the issues are fixed.
• There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates.
• Maintainers will then proceed with a normal review.

Converting a PR to draft is not a rejection — it is an invitation to bring the PR up to the project's standards so that maintainer review time is spent productively. There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.

[SakshamSinghal20]

@potiuk sorry for the inactivity, i have updated my branch.