DRIVERS-3479 Clarify logging truncation: Unicode code point safety and naive JSON are separate concerns#1937
Open
GromNaN wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
The previous wording placed "MUST handle gracefully" (Unicode code points) and "MUST implement naively" (JSON structure) in the same sentence, making them read as contradictory requirements. Rewrite to make clear they apply to different concerns: - Do not split a Unicode code point at the truncation boundary. - Do not attempt to produce valid JSON after truncation (naive truncation).
GromNaN
changed the title
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Jira: https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/DRIVERS-3479
The truncation section contained two
MUSTrequirements in the same sentence that appeared contradictory:These actually apply to different things: the first concerns Unicode validity (don't produce invalid Unicode by splitting a code point), the second concerns JSON structure (don't try to produce valid JSON after truncation). Rewrite the paragraph to make the two scopes explicit.
No behaviour change intended.