Skip to content

Proposed fix for #396: Implement propertyNames in terms full schema validation #397

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

JonasProgrammer
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #397 (28fd498) into master (dfd63aa) will decrease coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #397      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     70.68%   70.60%   -0.09%     
+ Complexity      753      744       -9     
============================================
  Files            81       81              
  Lines          2900     2885      -15     
  Branches        596      589       -7     
============================================
- Hits           2050     2037      -13     
+ Misses          628      627       -1     
+ Partials        222      221       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
...a/com/networknt/schema/PropertyNamesValidator.java 100.00% <100.00%> (+2.94%) 6.00 <0.00> (-11.00) ⬆️
...n/java/com/networknt/schema/ValidationMessage.java 62.50% <0.00%> (+1.38%) 13.00% <0.00%> (+1.00%)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update dfd63aa...28fd498. Read the comment docs.

- implement property names in terms of full schema validation
- add test case for complex property name
- added test case for networknt#342
- fix networknt#375 tests to expect standard messages
- closes networknt#396
- closes networknt#342
@JonasProgrammer JonasProgrammer force-pushed the proposal/396-property-names-as-schema branch from 28fd498 to d61d006 Compare April 11, 2021 11:34
@stevehu stevehu merged commit 6c573d4 into networknt:master Apr 12, 2021
@stevehu
Copy link
Contributor

stevehu commented Apr 12, 2021

@JonasProgrammer Nice fix!!! It was my mistake in the initial implementation due to the limited understanding of the document and the test cases. Thanks a lot for your help.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants