W-13157845: upgrade to AMF 5.3.0 #442
Conversation
| } else if (!(shape instanceof NilShape)) { | ||
| return false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I truly don't remember why this was here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what I understand is that it was used for checking that the the union is of array shapes only (including nil), so if there was a shape that was not an array or nil, then you stop the search and return false.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That being said, I don't think this code does the same, because if it is a union of an ArrayShape and a NodeShape, it will return true anyway because matches "any match", right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The original idea of hasAnArrayVariant was that:
// Let's imagine we have a parseType function
// Null doesn't have an array variant
assertFalse(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("nil")));
assertFalse(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("nil | nil")));
assertFalse(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("nil | nil | null")));
// Unions of arrays have an array variant
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("String[] | Integer[]")));
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("Integer[] | String[]")));
// Null is ignored in unions of arrays
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("String[] | Integer[] | nil")));
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("String[] | nil | Integer[]")));
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("nil | String[] | Integer[]")));
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("Integer[] | String[] | nil")));
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("Integer[] | nil | String[]")));
assertTrue(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("nil | Integer[] | String[]")));
// Any other type is not ignored in unions of arrays
assertFalse(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("string | Integer[] | String[]")));
assertFalse(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("Integer[] | string | String[]")));
assertFalse(hasAnArrayVariant(parseType("Integer[] | String[] | string")));Why was it like that?
I don't remember
I'll try to remember 🤷
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep, trying to figured out why
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it was related to which parameters may or may not be repeatable.
I would test against a parameters with type Integer | String[], Integer | Integer[] and String[] | Integer, etc and see which validations they trigger (or don't trigger) when passed on query params, json bodies and form-data.
Also... a lot of work to try out all that 😪
| "expression":{ | ||
| "language":"text/fhirpath", | ||
| "name":"Telemedicine Visit" | ||
| "resource": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was something that AMF starts validating correctly
interface-impl-amf/src/main/java/org/mule/amf/impl/model/ParameterImpl.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
parser-service/src/test/resources/query-validation-consistency/api.raml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
No description provided.