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

Add functionality to recreate a smithy model from smithy4s schemas/services #1470

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Apr 6, 2024

Conversation

lewisjkl
Copy link
Contributor

@lewisjkl lewisjkl commented Apr 3, 2024

Adds the capability to translate a smithy4s service or schema to the corresponding smithy model object (from the smithy model library). This lives in the dynamic module and will be useful for testing and other purposes in the future.

PR Checklist (not all items are relevant to all PRs)

  • Added unit-tests (for runtime code)
  • Added bootstrapped code + smoke tests (when the rendering logic is modified)
  • Added build-plugins integration tests (when reflection loading is required at codegen-time)
  • Added alloy compliance tests (when simpleRestJson protocol behaviour is expanded/updated)
  • Updated dynamic module to match generated-code behaviour
  • Added documentation
  • Updated changelog

@lewisjkl
Copy link
Contributor Author

lewisjkl commented Apr 3, 2024

Will update changelog and add documentation tomorrow, but wanted to put this up so people could take a look at what I have so far.

@lewisjkl lewisjkl marked this pull request as ready for review April 5, 2024 22:17
@Baccata Baccata changed the title add schema to smithy to dynamic module Add functionality to recreate a smithy model from smithy4s schemas/services Apr 6, 2024
@Baccata Baccata merged commit cfe7acb into series/0.18 Apr 6, 2024
11 checks passed
@Baccata Baccata deleted the smithy4s-schema-to-smithy branch April 6, 2024 14:34
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

3 participants