Add an semi-invalid fixture with repeated geometry fields #25
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
springmeyer
changed the title
springmeyer
changed the title
|
Thank you @springmeyer! I'm updating the base of this PR to point to |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This fixture incorrectly encodes two geometry fields. So instead of one field of
4with repeated values in a packed array, it adds two packed arrays with the same field id of4. I've marked this as recoverable since I figure a decoder could skip or otherwise take the first or last in this scenario.Note: based on the way
pbf/compileworks it looks like it encodes the first geometry field into the packaged data for both fields. Which is odd, but sufficient I think for an invalid fixture. It means that decoders may silently take the second field value (the second will win).