Implement structured field and rule paths for violations #213
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 
ghost
mentioned this pull request
pkwarren
approved these changes
Dec 2, 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Implements the changes needed to pass conformance after bufbuild/protovalidate#265.
This is basically a straight port of what is done in bufbuild/protovalidate-go#154, owing to the similarities between protovalidate-go and protovalidate-java. Unfortunately this means it inherits some of the trickier maneuvers needed to weave the right data into the right places. This version is also not as efficient as a result of differences between Go and Java protobufs, but effort was made to try to prevent big regressions in the case of successful validation.
Some of this is probably not as pretty as it could be. I'm open to improvements if there are any obvious things (I am certainly not a Java expert after all) but if possible I'd like to defer anything that would require major rethinking to down the road. (Happy to add TODOs for those, though.)
DO NOT MERGE until the following is done: