Fix oneof primitive types decoding #1632
Conversation
| import XCTest | ||
| import SwiftProtobuf | ||
|
|
||
| final class Test_OneofFields_Decoding: XCTestCase { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's already Test_Merge and Test_ParsingMerge, so I'd suggest extending one of those (maybe they should merge).
We also want to make sure everything is covered
- non repeating fields of pod types override
- non repeating fields of message types recursively merge
- repeating fields append
- oneof fields for pod overrides to the new value
- oneof fields for a message merges
- there's likely cases with extension fields also (repeating/non repeating, pod/message)
I also don't think you need the custom decoder here, just create a two messages, and then use the merge api on the binary data from the second message. There's some examples in the other files.
| @@ -345,6 +345,7 @@ class OneofGenerator { | |||
| hadValueTest = "hadOneofValue" | |||
| } else { | |||
| p.print("var v: \(field.swiftType)?") | |||
| p.print("if case \(field.dottedSwiftName)(let _v) = \(storedProperty) {v = _v}") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you split this change out, since this is the actual generator change, it makes it much easier to see.
| @@ -491,6 +491,7 @@ extension Conformance_ConformanceRequest: SwiftProtobuf.Message, SwiftProtobuf._ | |||
| switch fieldNumber { | |||
| case 1: try { | |||
| var v: Data? | |||
| if case .protobufPayload(let _v) = self.payload {v = _v} | |||
| try decoder.decodeSingularBytesField(value: &v) | |||
| if let v = v { | |||
| if self.payload != nil {try decoder.handleConflictingOneOf()} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This part I'm also no longer sure of.
If the oneof was already set to the same failed, is it always a potentially conflicting oneof? It likely is up to the decoder, but there is no longer enough info to say if it was already set to the same value or was set to a different oneof value.
|
I checked I think we can close this PR and its related issue as my problem solved with changing my code implementation and without any necessary addition in generated codes. |
This PR Fixes #1608