Skip to content

Adjust targets for RFC 53 #528

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
shaobo-he-aws merged 2 commits into from
Feb 7, 2025
Merged

Adjust targets for RFC 53 #528

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
f41d63e
Adjust targets for RFC 53
shaobo-he-aws Feb 6, 2025
1191d4b
refinement
shaobo-he-aws Feb 7, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
22 changes: 13 additions & 9 deletions cedar-drt/fuzz/fuzz_targets/roundtrip-entities.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -107,14 +107,18 @@ fuzz_target!(|input: FuzzTargetInput| {
Extensions::all_available(),
TCComputation::EnforceAlreadyComputed,
);
let roundtripped_entities = eparser
.from_json_value(json.clone())
.expect("Should be able to parse serialized entity JSON");
// Weaker assertion for schema based parsing because it adds actions from the schema into entities.
for e in input.entities {
let roundtripped_e = roundtripped_entities
.entity(e.uid())
.expect("Schema-based roundtrip dropped entity");
assert_eq!(&e, roundtripped_e);
match eparser.from_json_value(json.clone()) {
Ok(roundtripped_entities) => {
// Weaker assertion for schema based parsing because it adds actions from the schema into entities.
for e in input.entities {
let roundtripped_e = roundtripped_entities
.entity(e.uid())
.expect("Schema-based roundtrip dropped entity");
assert_eq!(&e, roundtripped_e);
}
}
Err(errs) => {
assert!(matches!(errs, EntitiesError::InvalidEntity(_)));
Copy link
Contributor

@cdisselkoen cdisselkoen Feb 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

could we add a comment explaining why InvalidEntity is the only expected error, just for future people who might see this code and wonder?

Copy link
Contributor

@john-h-kastner-aws john-h-kastner-aws Feb 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. I didn't follow this conversation and am already confused

Copy link
Contributor Author

@shaobo-he-aws shaobo-he-aws Feb 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes. I'll do it now.

}
}
});