js/binary/utils.js: Fix jspb.utils.joinUnsignedDecimalString to work with negative bitsLow and low but non-zero bitsHigh parameter. #8170
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We noticed that our generated javascript message implementations decode certain number fields incorrectly for some values when the fields have
jstype = JS_STRING
. I tracked it down toreadZigzagVarint64String()
, which does not always decode a field correctly. In particular, it returns the wrong result when it calls intojspb.utils.joinUnsignedDecimalString
with abitsLow
value that is negative and abitsHigh
value that is less than0x1FFFFF
. None of the existing test cases appear to cover that case.This PR changes
joinUnsignedDecimalString
to calljspb.utils.joinUint64
on its fast path instead, which gets us the right result.It's also possible to change the line to
or similar instead.
This is my first contact with this code and it wasn't clear to me if the bug is actually in the caller of
joinUnsignedDecimalString
. IfjoinUnsignedDecimalString
is expecting purely unsigned parameters then it's possible that this isn't the desired fix. But it would be great if we could get a fix landed :).Thanks for the awesome project which we make great use of throughout our stack :).