Update ion-schema and ion-rs dependencies #151
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗺️ Clippy recommended fixes because there was a double reference going on when passing &isl_type_name.
| @@ -436,6 +433,7 @@ mod model_tests { | |||
| ), | |||
| ] | |||
| .into_iter(), | |||
| true, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗺️ Adding true is the only change in this file that's required by the version updates. The others are clippy/fmt fixes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the true here? Can you comment it or give it a name? Random booleans in interfaces grow like rust as codebases age, and inhibit readability and maintainability unless you stay on top of it, imo.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ExpandedValueSource::Constructed(annotations, _) => self.inspect_ephemeral_annotations( | ||
| depth, | ||
| annotations.iter().copied().map(|s| Ok(s.into())), | ||
| ), | ||
| ExpandedValueSource::Constructed(annotations, _) => { | ||
| self.inspect_ephemeral_annotations(depth, annotations.iter().copied().map(Ok)) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗺️ This was a Clippy fix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗺️ Also a clippy fix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🗺️ Now that the dependencies are updated, we can refactor the validate command to use the CommandIo trait like the other commands—but I'm saving that for another day.
| @@ -436,6 +433,7 @@ mod model_tests { | |||
| ), | |||
| ] | |||
| .into_iter(), | |||
| true, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the true here? Can you comment it or give it a name? Random booleans in interfaces grow like rust as codebases age, and inhibit readability and maintainability unless you stay on top of it, imo.
| @@ -496,6 +491,7 @@ mod model_tests { | |||
| ), | |||
| ] | |||
| .into_iter(), | |||
| true, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same thing- what's the true?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is part of the ion schema model. It is something to do with whether the fields are closed for a given type. I'll create an issue to replace it with an enum.
| writer.write_string("Valid")?; | ||
| writer.set_field_name("value"); | ||
| writer.write_string(element_to_string(&owned_element)?)?; | ||
| writer.set_field_name("schema"); | ||
| writer.write_string(schema_id)?; | ||
| struct_writer.write("result", "Valid")?; | ||
| struct_writer.write("value", format!("{}", &owned_element))?; | ||
| struct_writer.write("schema", schema_id)?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
struct_writer really cleans this up, nice :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, @zslayton put a lot of effort into trying different approaches in order to find an ergonomic writer API.
Issue #, if available:
None.
Description of changes:
Updates
ion-rsandion-schemacrates to the latest versions. There's also a bunch of clippy fixes that ended up here too.By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.