Ruby: Experimental model editor support #14679
Conversation
hmac
force-pushed
the
hmac-model-editor-ruby
branch
from
b71410b to
a746ec9
Compare
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Add experimental support for the CodeQL Model Editor.
For model editing purposes.
This allows the model editor to find this query in a more robust way than by file path.
Gemspecs are sometimes named via the first argument to `Gem::Specification.new`: ```rb Gem::Specification.new 'sinatra' do |s| # ... end ```
hmac
force-pushed
the
hmac-model-editor-ruby
branch
from
d67fecf to
6a38223
Compare
| */ | ||
|
|
||
| // This query is empty as Application Mode is not yet supported for Ruby. | ||
| from int n |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we really need this placeholder query? If it is necessary, perhaps make it select columns of the right names and types but still use none() as the where clause. That should make it more clear what should be implemented if we ever support Application Mode.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, AFAIK the model editor expects this file to be present. I've updated it with more descriptive column names.
| */ | ||
| bindingset[this] | ||
| string getParameterTypes() { | ||
| // For now, return the names of postional parameters. We don't always have type information, so we can't return type names. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // For now, return the names of postional parameters. We don't always have type information, so we can't return type names. | |
| // For now, return the names of postional and keyword parameters. We don't always have type information, so we can't return type names. |
| pragma[nomagic] | ||
| predicate isNeutral() { | ||
| none() | ||
| // this instanceof FlowSummaryImpl::Public::NeutralCallable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this comment be removed ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's sort of a hint (from the C# version) for what we should do here, but I'm happy to remove it.
| or | ||
| not this.isSupported() and result = "" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it necessary to use empty string as special value?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe so - if we don't return a value here then the rows will not show up in the query, and most endpoints will not be supported. If you're asking why we don't use a more descriptive value such as "not-supported" - I don't know. But we should try to stay consistent with Java/C# as much as we can I think, and this is what they do.
| exists(string type, string path, string method | | ||
| method = path.regexpCapture("(Method\\[[^\\]]+\\]).*", 1) and | ||
| Util::pathToMethod(this, type, method) and | ||
| sinkModel(type, path, _) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be sourceModel? Currently SinkCallable and SourceCallable are identical except for the extends clause.
| sinkModel(type, path, _) | |
| sourceModel(type, path, _) |
Prototype support for working with Ruby models in the model editor.