Possible inconsistence between isEmpty and pop in Channels class (V2)?

[adalbertocajueiro]

Describe the bug

I have faced a small problem when obtaining the the channels interface from a specification (spec.allChannels()). It returns a ChannelsInterface object which extends Collection which extends Array. When invoking method pop() the state change occurs as expected. However, if we remove all elements through many pop() invocations, the methods isEmpty() does not returns true because it checks the length of the internal collection field, instead of the elements (in the array sense). Is this a consistence problem or I'm using methods wrongly?

How to Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the issue. Attach all resources that can help us understand the issue:

• Load the content of an asyncapi specification containing channels into a variable content
• Obtain the APIDocument by parsing the content: var parsedObject = parse.parse(content)
• Get the channels: var channels = parsedObject.document.allChannels()
• test the code to check if it has an infinite loop:
  while(this.channels!.isEmpty() > 0){
  this.channels?.pop()
  }

Expected behavior

channels becomes clear and the above loop stops. I have changed the use of .isEmpty() by .length and everything worked.

[github-actions]

Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for reporting your first issue. Please check out our contributors guide and the instructions about a basic recommended setup useful for opening a pull request.
Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️

[smoya]

Is this still valid? We should definitely test it.

[adalbertocajueiro]

Hi smoya. I have closed this issue. Instead of traversing the asyncapi object I moved to use the asyncapi/parser tool, which is not affected by it. Many thanks.