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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
builtin: Return evalerrors.ErrEvaluationSkipSilently in case the builtin evaluator doesn't match the entity #800
builtin: Return evalerrors.ErrEvaluationSkipSilently in case the builtin evaluator doesn't match the entity #800
Changes from all commits
792d3b3
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It would be super-nifty if this returned a typed result that could be invoked without the jiggery-pokery on lines 76-87 of
builtin.go
(i.e. by moving them here, but otherRuleMethodGetter
implementations could use actual types).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think that type would be:
func(context.Context, string, any) (any, error)
or maybefunc(context.Context, string, any) (json.RawMessage, error)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm probably a bad Go programmer but I couldn't make the conversion from the reflected Value to the function type work.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this work, or do we just have no methods defined right now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
currently there's no methods. We used to have the artifact verification method as a single builtin but the method and the builtin ingestor as a whole proved to be too limiting for what we needed to do so I ended up just adding a specialised artifact ingestor.
As I was trying to use the builtin ingestor for artifacts, I noticed this bug that we treat skipped entries as passing policy. That felt like a big enough bug to fix even if the ingestor is unused at the moment.
But at the same time, I think the builtin ingest still has value, so I didn't want to just nuke it completely. Actually, as I was writing this comment I realised that it would be better and make for easier testing if we have at least one method, so I added a "Passthrough" (that we already talked about before).
This also makes for better tests which are needed /especially/ because we don't use the builtin ingestor at the moment.