-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 291
fix: anyOf compare alternatives #1037
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix: anyOf compare alternatives #1037
Conversation
@@ -866,7 +872,7 @@ function validate( | |||
const val = getNodeValue(node); | |||
let enumValueMatch = false; | |||
for (const e of schema.enum) { | |||
if (equals(val, e) || (callFromAutoComplete && isString(val) && isString(e) && val && e.startsWith(val))) { | |||
if (equals(val, e) || isAutoCompleteEqualMaybe(callFromAutoComplete, node, val, e)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
null value is a good match in auto-completion
} else if (compareResult === 0) { | ||
} else if ( | ||
compareResult === 0 || | ||
((node.value === null || node.type === 'null') && node.length === 0) // node with no value can match any schema potentially |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
null yaml value is a good match for sub-schemas, similar to isAutoCompleteEqualMaybe
for const and enums
if ( | ||
!maxOneMatch && | ||
!subValidationResult.hasProblems() && | ||
(!bestMatch.validationResult.hasProblems() || callFromAutoComplete) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(!bestMatch.validationResult.hasProblems() || callFromAutoComplete)
didn't solve the previous problem properly
problem was when the order of the subschemas in anyOf changed.
this previous fix allows 'issues' only on the previous bestMatch
Bump, I came across the same issue, I made a PR that also adds some gracefulMatching behaviour (naming is hard...) #1048 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@p-spacek Please resolve the conflicts |
@msivasubramaniaan thanks for review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
What does this PR do?
improve compare mechanism that should choose correct schema alternatives
What issues does this PR fix or reference?
fixes this issue #684
replces this PR #759
Is it tested? How?
added tests