updated odata.context computation to remove trailing cast segments th…

[corranrogue9]

…at are following by key segments as well as the case where the standard key syntax is used within a cast segment

Issues

This pull request fixes #2680.

Description

When the request URL ends in a cast segment followed by a key segment, we throw an exception because the @odata.context should not end in such segments, but we do not trim them out of the request URL when generating the @odata.context.

To fix this, the ODataContextUrlInfo has been updated to call a new trim extension method for ODataPath which trims all cast and key segments from the ends of the path, regardless of the order of the segments. Since there were two methods which both had this logic that needed to be updated, those two methods were refactored to have a single method that contains the relevant logic that both methods call into (reducing duplicate code).

Checklist (Uncheck if it is not completed)

• Test cases added
• Build and test with one-click build and test script passed

Additional work necessary

We likely shouldn't throw an exception in this case, but instead return a "bad" @odata.context. We should keep the check as a Debug.Assert probably, but not throw in release configurations.

The new trim method does not leverage the WalkWith methods on ODataPath. WalkWith always starts at the beginning, and always requires enumerating the entire path, even when not necessary. We should update and consolidate other trim variants on ODataPath to remove the use of these handlers wherever feasible.

We could also optimize the use of the Take LINQ query by having ODataPath take in an IReadOnlyList, and then having a "slice" extension on it to allow the ODataPath to not need to always enumerate all of the segments passed into the constructor.

[corranrogue9]

@KenitoInc @habbes @xuzhg @ElizabethOkerio @gathogojr @chrisspre @mikepizzo I'd really love to get a review on this

[corranrogue9]

@KenitoInc @habbes @xuzhg @ElizabethOkerio @gathogojr @chrisspre @mikepizzo ping...this is going to start blocking an AGS workload soon

[corranrogue9]

@KenitoInc @habbes @xuzhg @ElizabethOkerio @gathogojr @chrisspre @mikepizzo ping...

[KenitoInc]

We should have unit tests for the new public extension method.
Otherwise the PR looks good to merge

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 271 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Large
Size       : +266 -5
Percentile : 67.1%

Total files changed: 19

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +151 -2
.txt : +10 -3
.xml : +61 -0
.csproj : +8 -0
.bsl : +36 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[corranrogue9]

We should have unit tests for the new public extension method. Otherwise the PR looks good to merge

Thanks @KenitoInc. I've added the unit test, but there are a number of other changes too if you can take another look.

[corranrogue9]

@KenitoInc @habbes @xuzhg @ElizabethOkerio @gathogojr @chrisspre @mikepizzo ping...

[corranrogue9]

@KenitoInc @habbes @xuzhg @ElizabethOkerio @gathogojr @chrisspre @mikepizzo can you please take a look when you get a chance?