Strict conformance fixes #212
Merged
Conversation
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
ghost
requested a review
from 
pkwarren
reviewed
Nov 26, 2024
pkwarren
approved these changes
Nov 26, 2024
This pull request was closed.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As it turns out, not specifying
--strictto the conformance test runner will cause--strict_messageand--strict_errorto do nothing. The conformance runner will just silently treat any validation errors as matching. Yikes.Thankfully, protovalidate-java only had a few issues hidden by this footgun, and they are easily rectified after a bit of debugging.
Most of these issues are really quite minor and mainly just have to do with consistency across languages, but notably we were not marking validation errors from map keys properly, so that will be worth rolling into a release as soon as possible.