-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
all: add support for shielding hostcalls #172
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.
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
Conversation
Blocked on fastly/Viceroy#504 with shielding support for CI. |
ed3e036
to
380fb00
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hiding cacheKey
is the only thing that I feel strongly about, others are just nits / opinions.
380fb00
to
fd65888
Compare
dcc843d
to
297032b
Compare
PTAL |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My feedback was addressed :)
// BackendOptions | ||
type BackendOptions struct { | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Backend returns a named backend for use with the fsthttp package. | ||
func (s *Shield) Backend(opts *BackendOptions) (string, error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is reserving the ability to add options later and not break the public API?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes. There was an (unexported) option in the Rust SDK that I copied over, but have since removed.
297032b
to
4b6a1a5
Compare
Last minute fixup; changed the info target parsing code but at the same time removed the API calls that were checking they worked. (Spoiler: it didn't..) |
Force pushes make it hard to tell what changed (I'd be fine with a squashed merge at the end for this OSS repo, though!) |
Yeah, I realized afterwards that this kind of fixup probably should have been a separate commit and then squashed at merge time.
|
I just explored this in the playground (current code) and LGTM. |
No description provided.