feat(AIP-123): enforce singular as ID segment #1403
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
jskeet
reviewed
Jul 4, 2024
jskeet
approved these changes
Jul 10, 2024
slevenick
reviewed
Jul 24, 2024
|
|
||
| if !utils.IsSingletonResource(m) { | ||
| singular = fmt.Sprintf("{%s}", strcase.SnakeCase(singular)) | ||
| nn = fmt.Sprintf("{%s}", nn) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you have a non-nested singleton will this be empty as nn will be unset? Or is that case impossible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think non-nested singletons are possible since they depend on the lifecycle of another resource e.g. when X is created, XSingleton is also created. I don't know of any examples of them either.
That said, this specific line wouldn't be executed b.c the check "if no singleton" above would skip this in that case.
but having top-level singletons shouldn't be a thing...this did remind me though that I needed to better handle that case in the "is root level" check (fixed).
slevenick
approved these changes
Jul 24, 2024
gcf-merge-on-green bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
Lint for the `plural` appearing as the collection segment in resource patterns. Special handling for nested resource collections that potentially stutter with the pattern, affording a reduced collection segment in the pattern. See #1403 for more details. The nested plural form is derived in a round about way where we check to see if the parent resource singular (via the resource ID segment) is a prefix of the child collection segment. We use the parent singular because the child plural wouldn't use the parent plural as the prefix in a "compound"/nested name, it would use the parent singular. This prefix is trimmed if it matches, leaving a reduced child collection name that is already pluralized. For internal bug http://b/343466943
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Fair warning, this is a big PR.
Enforces the following guidance from AIP-123:
It takes special consideration for stuttering child resource names as documented in AIP-122 Nested Collections. It does this in a somewhat awkward way in that it compares the resource
singularform insnake_caseto the parent resource ID segment (if present). If the parent ID segment is a prefix of the snake_casesingularfor the resource, then it is considered nested e.g.{author}parent ID segment compared toauthor_creditwould be considered nested and eligible for reduction to justcreditin the resource pattern(s). This handles child resources that are singletons as well.It only recommends this reduction in the following cases:
The same needs to be done for
pluralas collection ID in resource patterns and they should be merged/released together.For internal bug b/343465929
P.S.: also updates the "bugged"
resource-singularrule documentation - copy+paste strikes again.