validation: Allow loose validation for sets #247
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
cncf-cla: yes
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: apelisse The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
approved
typed/typed.go
Outdated
| type ValidationOptions int | ||
|
|
||
| const ( | ||
| Loose ValidationOptions = iota |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also I'm actually renaming this AllowDuplicates since .. that's a lot closer to what it actually is.
If a set (or associative lists keys) has duplicated elements, then this will not fail the validation. Everything is still the same.
apelisse
force-pushed
the
loose-validation
branch
from
1f9a5be to
db12191
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
| // AsTyped accepts a value and a type and returns a TypedValue. 'v' must have | ||
| // type 'typeName' in the schema. An error is returned if the v doesn't conform | ||
| // to the schema. | ||
| func AsTyped(v value.Value, s *schema.Schema, typeRef schema.TypeRef) (*TypedValue, error) { | ||
| func AsTyped(v value.Value, s *schema.Schema, typeRef schema.TypeRef, opts ...ValidationOptions) (*TypedValue, error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've decided to use that convention since we want to backport this code and I didn't want to break the compatibility with existing code (forcing me to bump the major version). Alternative could be to make a AsTypedWithDuplicates
|
/hold edit: whoops too late |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
No worries, let me know what you want me to address, I'll focus on that before continuing. |
| @@ -24,16 +24,24 @@ import ( | |||
| "sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff/v4/value" | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
| // ValidationOptions is the list of all the options available when running the validation. | |||
| type ValidationOptions int | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Think it would be better if this was not an int and instead something like a func (v *validatingObjectWalker) or something similar so that we aren't bound to very simple options in the future.
If a set (or associative lists keys) has duplicated elements, then this will not fail the validation. Everything else is still the same.
/assign @alexzielenski