-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 98
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: add missing anonymous schema id's #43
fix: add missing anonymous schema id's #43
Conversation
Re-parsed expected AsyncAPI documents for parse_test.js
I actually have not checked how it handles circle references should I create a test for that 🤔 ? |
Sorry, didn't see conflicts, give me 2 seconds. |
…i#45) * Add welcome message handling with GH action * Add stale issues handing GH action
Bumps [acorn](https://github.com/acornjs/acorn) from 5.7.3 to 5.7.4. - [Release notes](https://github.com/acornjs/acorn/releases) - [Commits](acornjs/acorn@5.7.3...5.7.4) Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
…i#44) * Extract RAML parser to its own package * Remove RAML tests * Extract OpenAPI too * Add RAML and OpenAPI links to README
I absolutely hate rebasing 🗡 |
@jonaslagoni is it like ready ready for review or better to leave it for Monday 😄 I say you pushed some additional things after requesting review. Maybe you want to work more on it over the weekend 😆 |
@derberg it is ready, I just saw in the changes here on GitHub it had some weird formatting but seems like I couldn't change it 🤔 let me know if it is crucial and I'll take another look :) |
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.
Well done. I added only few suggestions.
I'm missing some tests in asyncapi_test.js
though. I would expect:
- extend
should return an array with all the schemas used in the document
with "nested json schema" case we discussed under the issue. or maybe a separate test? - would be also great so see some tests that makes sure
assignUidToParameterSchemas
works as expected
Sorry again for such a late review 😭 I owe you 🍺
Co-Authored-By: Lukasz Gornicki <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Lukasz Gornicki <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Lukasz Gornicki <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Lukasz Gornicki <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Lukasz Gornicki <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: Lukasz Gornicki <[email protected]>
Thanks for the review!
Agree, however this PR only tackles the problem that the id of recursive schemas are never sat, i'll add this test in the other PR 😄
I agree, I'll add this now. |
sorry @jonaslagoni that you had to ping me again and instead of approval I'm again back with a question, but didn't we agree in the issue that we should not assume id to be the same as the property key |
@derberg no worries 😄 Yes, and I fail to see where the properties are being assigned to the property name instead of anonymous id? The current implementation should: |
@jonaslagoni you are so right man, I should limit 🥃 in the late evenings |
@derberg added your last changes 😄 |
🎉 This PR is included in version 0.16.1 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
fixes #42