55 operations fields same struct #66
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
alexgarzao
requested review from
XavierFilipe,
apiovani,
eminetto,
fabriciogpp,
felipeagger,
leocavalcante,
mbier and
mfbmina
fabriciogpp
approved these changes
Aug 29, 2025
leocavalcante
approved these changes
Aug 29, 2025
marceloavan
approved these changes
Aug 29, 2025
devxbr
approved these changes
Aug 29, 2025
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR implements cross-field validation support for ValidGen, enabling field-to-field comparisons within structs. It adds six new validation operations (eqfield, neqfield, gtefield, gtfield, ltefield, ltfield) that allow validating one field against another field's value, with proper type checking and error handling.
Key changes include:
- Added support for cross-field validation operations with type compatibility checks
- Implemented comprehensive analyzer validation to ensure field operations reference existing fields and have matching types
- Extended code generation to handle field-to-field comparisons with appropriate error messages
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 11 out of 11 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
internal/analyzer/operations.go |
New file defining all validation operations with metadata including field operation flags and valid types |
internal/analyzer/analyzer.go |
Added field operation analysis to validate cross-field references and type compatibility |
internal/analyzer/parser_validation.go |
Refactored to use centralized operations configuration |
internal/codegenerator/test_elements.go |
Added condition mappings for new cross-field validation operations |
tests/endtoend/ |
Added comprehensive end-to-end tests for cross-field validations |
internal/codegenerator/get_test_elements_between_fields_test.go |
Unit tests for cross-field test element generation |
internal/codegenerator/build_func_validator_test.go |
Updated validator function generation tests |
internal/analyzer/analyzer_test.go |
New comprehensive analyzer tests for field operations |
README.md |
Updated documentation with new validation operations and examples |
Comment on lines
+126
to
+175
| "eqfield": { | ||
| Name: "eqfield", | ||
| CountValues: ONE_VALUE, | ||
| IsFieldOperation: true, | ||
| ValidTypes: map[string]bool{ | ||
| "string": true, | ||
| "uint8": true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "neqfield": { | ||
| Name: "neqfield", | ||
| CountValues: ONE_VALUE, | ||
| IsFieldOperation: true, | ||
| ValidTypes: map[string]bool{ | ||
| "string": true, | ||
| "uint8": true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "gtefield": { | ||
| Name: "gtefield", | ||
| CountValues: ONE_VALUE, | ||
| IsFieldOperation: true, | ||
| ValidTypes: map[string]bool{ | ||
| "uint8": true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "gtfield": { | ||
| Name: "gtfield", | ||
| CountValues: ONE_VALUE, | ||
| IsFieldOperation: true, | ||
| ValidTypes: map[string]bool{ | ||
| "uint8": true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "ltefield": { | ||
| Name: "ltefield", | ||
| CountValues: ONE_VALUE, | ||
| IsFieldOperation: true, | ||
| ValidTypes: map[string]bool{ | ||
| "uint8": true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| "ltfield": { | ||
| Name: "ltfield", | ||
| CountValues: ONE_VALUE, | ||
| IsFieldOperation: true, | ||
| ValidTypes: map[string]bool{ | ||
| "uint8": true, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[nitpick] The operation definitions contain significant duplication. Consider extracting common patterns into helper functions or using a more structured approach to reduce redundancy and improve maintainability.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Closes #55
This PR adds support for cross-field validations (field-to-field comparisons), allowing validations such as "field must be equal to another field" or "field must be greater than another field". It introduces new validation keywords (
eqfield,neqfield,gtefield,gtfield,ltefield,ltfield), updates the analyzer to check correctness of these operations, and extends the code generator and documentation accordingly. Comprehensive unit tests for these features are also included.Cross-field validation support:
eqfield,neqfield,gtefield,gtfield,ltefield,ltfield, including their parsing, validation, and enforcement of type compatibility. [1] [2] [3]Testing enhancements:
Documentation updates:
README.mdto document the new cross-field validation operations, their supported types, and usage examples. [1] [2] [3] [4]These changes collectively make
validgenmore powerful and expressive by enabling validation rules that compare values between fields within a struct.