Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update gnostic to use yaml.v3 #194

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Jul 14, 2020
Merged

Update gnostic to use yaml.v3 #194

merged 14 commits into from
Jul 14, 2020

Conversation

timburks
Copy link
Contributor

This set of changes upgrades gnostic's JSON/YAML reading to use gopkg.in/yaml.v3.

In addition to having a cleaner interface, yaml.v3 maintains line and column numbers for all parsed elements, which will allow us to address #31 in a future set of changes.

This first set of commits should be enough for all tests to pass, but there are still many rough edges to be addressed before this is merged.

repeated NamedAny specification_extension = 7;
string summary = 8;
string summary = 7;
repeated NamedAny specification_extension = 8;
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These need to be swapped back

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed.

type_url: "type.googleapis.com/google.protobuf.StringValue"
value: "\n\00512345"
type_url: "type.googleapis.com/google.protobuf.Int64Value"
value: "\010\271`"
>
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test data was updated because the original was incorrect.

@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@
"id": "x-sampleone-mysimpleboolean"
},
"PrimitiveInt64": {
"type": "string",
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test was incorrect.

@timburks
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is ugly in places but all tests pass and #195 provides a fix for clients that I expect will be broken by this change.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant