Remove restriction for unflattening into empty field names #3814
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dominiklohmann
added
operator
dominiklohmann
force-pushed
the
topic/unflatten-empty-name
branch
from
59a88ca
to
41ef75e
Compare
This restriction was put in place when record field names were not allowed to be empty. That is no longer the case, so we can safely remove it. There is still some more work to do before this becomes really useful for GELF, as that still requires moving from that top-level empty-named field into the top-level record itself, but this is an easy step forward.
dominiklohmann
force-pushed
the
topic/unflatten-empty-name
branch
from
2779aec
to
2a2f14e
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This restriction was put in place when record field names were not allowed to be empty. That is no longer the case, so we can safely remove it.
There is still some more work to do before this becomes really useful for GELF, as that still requires moving from that top-level empty-named field into the top-level record itself, but this is an easy step forward.