Unable to add protobuf wrappers in url template option

[mayank-dixit]

Pre

1. Using string value from: https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/master/src/google/protobuf/wrappers.proto
2. protoc version: 3.6.1

Steps

My proto file looks like this:

helloworld.proto

syntax = "proto3";

package helloworld;

import "google/api/annotations.proto";
import "google/protobuf/wrappers.proto";

service Greeter {
  rpc SayHello (HelloRequest) returns (HelloReply) {
    option (google.api.http) = {
      get: "/say/{strVal}"
    };
  }
}

message HelloRequest {
  google.protobuf.StringValue strVal = 5;
}

message HelloReply {
  string message = 1;
}

And then I try compile protos:

protoc -I/usr/local/include -I. \
  -I$GOPATH/src \
  -I$GOPATH/src/github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/third_party/googleapis \
  --go_out=plugins=grpc:. \
  helloworld/helloworld.proto

Works fine. And then I try to generate reverse proxy using:

protoc -I/usr/local/include -I. \
  -I$GOPATH/src \
  -I$GOPATH/src/github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/third_party/googleapis \
  --grpc-gateway_out=logtostderr=true:. \
  helloworld/helloworld.proto

expected:

Successful compilation

result:

--grpc-gateway_out: aggregate type TYPE_MESSAGE in parameter of Greeter.SayHello: strVal

[johanbrandhorst]

I've no idea why this is erroring, have you had a chance to do some debugging?

[mayank-dixit]

Yes, I tried to debug:
Error is thrown from:
https://github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/blob/master/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway/descriptor/services.go#L221
Where it doesn't find *target.TypeName(.google.protobuf.StringValue) to be a well known type.

Recognised well-known types are added here:
https://github.com/grpc-ecosystem/grpc-gateway/blob/master/protoc-gen-grpc-gateway/descriptor/types.go#L453

[johanbrandhorst]

Huh, interesting, perhaps we just need to add the rest of the well known types there?

[mayank-dixit]

I'm adding other types. It's passing. I'll verify end to end once. if all goes fine, I'll raise a PR?

[johanbrandhorst]

Yes, thanks a lot!

[achew22]

Fixed by #809. Thanks for your PR!

[johanbrandhorst]

It appears the MR discussed #809 just generates invalid code. @mayank-dixit are you interested in submitting a PR which adds the functions?

[johanbrandhorst]

Nevermind, still confused, continue discussion in #809

[johanbrandhorst]

Reopening as there's definitely a problem with the current code, see #809 (comment)

[johanbrandhorst]

Still not fixed, reopening