Skip to content
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

[csharp-netcore] Avoid reserved words in CodegenProperty name #11926

Closed
wants to merge 72 commits into from

Conversation

devhl-labs
Copy link
Contributor

@devhl-labs devhl-labs commented Mar 20, 2022

This will locate any CodegenProperty#name and prefix with "Property" if the name, or the CamelCaseLambda version of the name, is a reserved word. If we don't do this, then the CamelCaseLambda version will prefix an underscore. The underscore can break the mapping between the json property and the class property.

fixes #11868 (comment)

  • Read the contribution guidelines.
  • Pull Request title clearly describes the work in the pull request and Pull Request description provides details about how to validate the work. Missing information here may result in delayed response from the community.
  • Run the following to build the project and update samples:
    ./mvnw clean package 
    ./bin/generate-samples.sh
    ./bin/utils/export_docs_generators.sh
    
    Commit all changed files.
    This is important, as CI jobs will verify all generator outputs of your HEAD commit as it would merge with master.
    These must match the expectations made by your contribution.
    You may regenerate an individual generator by passing the relevant config(s) as an argument to the script, for example ./bin/generate-samples.sh bin/configs/java*.
    For Windows users, please run the script in Git BASH.
  • File the PR against the correct branch: master (5.3.0), 6.0.x
  • If your PR is targeting a particular programming language, @mention the technical committee members, so they are more likely to review the pull request.

@mandrean (2017/08) @frankyjuang (2019/09) @shibayan (2020/02) @Blackclaws (2021/03) @lucamazzanti (2021/05)

@devhl-labs
Copy link
Contributor Author

I switched from using a suffix to a prefix. It was initially a prefix because of worry I had which shouldn't be an issue in hindsight.

@devhl-labs
Copy link
Contributor Author

devhl-labs commented Apr 18, 2022

This PR fixes this scenario. Without the fix we get this. The underscore on the internal property causes the deserialization to fail.

public TestModel(bool? active = default, Guid? modelUuid = default, bool? _internal = default)
{
    Active = active;
    ModelUuid = modelUuid;
    Internal = _internal;
}

With this fix, we get this:

  public TestModel(bool? active = default, Guid? modelUuid = default, bool? internalProperty = default)
  {
      Active = active;
      ModelUuid = modelUuid;
      InternalProperty = internalProperty;
  }

Here is the same thing when using RestSharp:

public TestModel(bool active = default(bool), Guid modelUuid = default(Guid), bool _internal = default(bool))
{
    this.Active = active;
    this.ModelUuid = modelUuid;
    this.Internal = _internal;
}
public TestModel(bool active = default(bool), Guid modelUuid = default(Guid), bool internalProperty = default(bool))
{
    this.Active = active;
    this.ModelUuid = modelUuid;
    this.InternalProperty = internalProperty;
}

Here is the yaml used to test this.

openapi: 3.0.3
info:
  title: Test openapi spec file for parameterless constructor issue
  version: v1
paths:
  '/hello':
    get:
      responses:
        '200':
          description: Success
          content:
            application/json:
              schema:
                $ref: '#/components/schemas/TestModel'

components:
  schemas:
    TestModel:
      description: Model information
      properties:
        active:
          description: active description
          type: boolean
        model_uuid:
          description: model uuid description
          type: string
          format: uuid
        internal:
          description: internal value
          type: boolean

@devhl-labs
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing in favor of better implementation at #13681

@devhl-labs devhl-labs closed this Oct 21, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants