-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 216
ref: test empty tokens in json-pointer #664
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
ref: test empty tokens in json-pointer #664
Conversation
I don't support draft 4. Can you go ahead and add to draft 6 so I can run it, please? (also needs a rebase) This looks like a valid test to me. |
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.
Works on my implementation
added tests in remaining drafts |
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.
Thanks. These all work for me.
The check that's failing is requiring that all schemas have $id
(id
for draft 4). If you can add those, I'll go ahead and merge.
@gregsdennis added $id to schemas the check still seems to be failing |
I'm sorry. I assumed that was the problem, but it's not. The error is:
It looks like the check is trying to validate the definition |
let me know if |
The sanity check is somewhat brutish, essentially because doing what it wants to do in general for this is hard -- yes there is no reason you need an |
The commit I pushed should fix this (yes please remove the IDs when they're not needed). |
removed '$id' from schemas |
(You removed the fix commit, you'll need to cherry pick it back) |
@Julian not sure how to do cherry picking. trying it from google |
If you pulled before force pushing, just run |
I did not pull your change, before I did force push. now a81ddee is not showing up in my repo |
@Julian I took diff from your commit and applied it. |
I reverted my change. please recommit your change when you are back. sorry for the confusion. |
The test in this PR (#664) actually trips a bug in the older version (where it doesn't properly consider the keys in definitions to not be schemas, they're just labels)
(Re-pushed.) |
I think we're good now. Thanks @Julian. I'm going to go ahead and merge. |
I added the test to just draft4.
if the test looks fine. will add to remaining drafts.
the test passes with my impl https://github.com/santhosh-tekuri/boon
FYI: for example java.util.StringTokenizer does not return empty tokens.