-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
fix: [OData] Name mapping bug in NamingUtils
#1026
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from 9 commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
3083a1b
test
rpanackal f6e02ed
Stop reprocessing of existing name
rpanackal e3d1f4b
formatting
rpanackal a31c1ab
Target NamingUtils
rpanackal f862640
fix and test NamingUtils
rpanackal 3867d20
Revert change in EdmService
rpanackal ea3bec1
test
rpanackal c00c711
cleanup
rpanackal 0d0d9c9
cleanup
rpanackal 11c07c0
Better regex
rpanackal 70d85b3
replaceFirst instead of replaceAll
rpanackal ff611a5
Revert "replaceFirst instead of replaceAll"
rpanackal File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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 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 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
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
(Major)
Wouldn't this match edge-cases like "SapInvoice"?
I would probably rather go with something like "A(pi|PI)" or straight up two lines.
Edit: I realize you changed the replacement from "anywhere in the string" to "only in the beginning". Therefore potentially bringing a breaking change for existing users that rely on "Api" being removed from their service name(?).
Which would be fine if we had a major release or sth.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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, It is breaking change.My rational was, to be consistent across regeneration, we have three optionsAlways remove "Api"breaking to users relying on ApiAlways keep "Api"breaking to users who have been regenerating with.edmxfile updates.Don't apply any transformations to mappings that are read fromserviceNameMappings.propertiesI didn't feel confident about removing this additional transformation as it might be a safety measure (?). But, it would be non-breaking.What do you think about Option 3?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.
I didnt get your comment the first time. I have updated the regex.
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.
It still is not edge-case free. Eg: "Apiary" would be matched. But this is unavoidable