-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 86
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: properly handle circular regressions to prevent call stack exceptions #253
Conversation
…tions A regression was recently introduced to the validator in the circular references utility that prevented such references from being caught and sanitized. This resulted in "call stack exceeded" expections for certain patterns using circular references. The regression came in the form of checking for only "plain" objects, rather than all "objects" (which include arrays). This happened in a recent community PR and I didn't realize the consequences when I reviewed and merged. I went back and double checked every instance of this change in that PR and believe this is the only one that is problematic. I fixed it and added a new test case that would've caught this regression had it been there.
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.
Changes look good and a great, convincing test!
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.
Looks good! 👍
## [0.34.4](v0.34.3...v0.34.4) (2021-03-01) ### Bug Fixes * properly handle circular regressions to prevent call stack exceptions ([#253](#253)) ([3696487](3696487))
🎉 This PR is included in version 0.34.4 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
A regression was recently introduced to the validator in the circular references
utility that prevented such references from being caught and sanitized. This resulted
in "call stack exceeded" exceptions for certain patterns using circular references.
The regression came in the form of checking for only "plain" objects, rather than
all "objects" (which include arrays). This happened in a recent community PR and I
didn't realize the consequences when I reviewed and merged. I went back and double
checked every instance of this change in that PR and believe this is the only one
that is problematic. I fixed it and added a new test case that would've caught this
regression had it been there.
Resolves #251