Add JSON literal tests. #559
Draft
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
- Various tests of when `@type` of `@json` is used, the JSON may be an array, and the interaction with a `@container` of `@set` and `@list`. - Change compaction output for `@json` and `@set` with a JSON array. - Add test for many other possibilities and processing algorithms. - Propose new `multiple JSON literals` error code when trying to add multiple JSON literals as values for a property.
This was referenced Mar 1, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@typeof@jsonis used, the JSON may be an array, and the interaction with a@containerof@setand@list.@jsonand@setwith a JSON array.multiple JSON literalserror code when trying to add multiple JSON literals as values for a property not declared a@set.NOTE: This is a work-in-progress that needs feedback. HTML rebuild has not yet been done.
Please put major discussion in the issue that links here as this PR may need to be replaced.