Use getField CEL function #352
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
This is a proposal to remove our hack around the fact the `in` identifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this sort of functionality to be added in at runtime.
ghost
mentioned this pull request
|
The latest Buf updates on your PR. Results from workflow Buf CI / buf (pull_request).
|
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-cc
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 22, 2025
I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the in identifier is reserved in CEL. We need this for protovalidate-cc especially so we can start removing our cel-cpp patches. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
ghost
mentioned this pull request
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-cc
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 22, 2025
I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the in identifier is reserved in CEL. We need this for protovalidate-cc especially so we can start removing our cel-cpp patches. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
ghost
mentioned this pull request
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-java
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 22, 2025
I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the `in` identifier is reserved in CEL. We need this for protovalidate-cc especially so we can start removing our cel-cpp patches. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
ghost
mentioned this pull request
ghost
marked this pull request as ready for review
Member
|
LGTM! Do we want to also use this with |
Author
|
I added it for |
rodaine
approved these changes
Apr 22, 2025
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-java
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 23, 2025
I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the `in` identifier is reserved in CEL. We need this for protovalidate-cc especially so we can start removing our cel-cpp patches. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-go
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 23, 2025
I think it has to be a global overload, a member overload would require a generic on the receiver which doesn't seem possible. I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the `in` identifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this sort of functionality to be added in at runtime. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-cc
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 23, 2025
I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the in identifier is reserved in CEL. We need this for protovalidate-cc especially so we can start removing our cel-cpp patches. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
ghost
pushed a commit
to bufbuild/protovalidate-python
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 23, 2025
I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the `in` identifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this sort of functionality to be added in at runtime. Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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 is a proposal to remove our hack around the fact the
inidentifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this sort of functionality to be added in at runtime.Runtime PRs: