-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 148
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
fix: _fromProtobuf functions where google primitive wrappers used #2657
Merged
ivaylonikolov7
merged 12 commits into
main
from
fix-from-protobuf-functions-where-google-primitive-wrappers-used
Nov 20, 2024
Merged
fix: _fromProtobuf functions where google primitive wrappers used #2657
ivaylonikolov7
merged 12 commits into
main
from
fix-from-protobuf-functions-where-google-primitive-wrappers-used
Nov 20, 2024
Conversation
This file contains 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
…pdateTransaction Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Signed-off-by: Svetoslav Borislavov <svetoslav.borislavov@limechain.tech>
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
0xivanov
approved these changes
Nov 20, 2024
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.
LGTM
ivaylonikolov7
deleted the
fix-from-protobuf-functions-where-google-primitive-wrappers-used
branch
November 20, 2024 14:21
This was referenced Nov 27, 2024
Merged
Merged
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Description:
This pull request updates the
_fromProtobuf
function of the following classes:This change is required because the protobufs for the bodies (or the data) of these classes use the primitive wrappers
These wrappers are necessary when the property is nullable. Since the wrapper is a sub-message with a
value
it assumed that:The problem with the current implementation is that it checks whether the wrapper's
value
is null, which is incorrect because the wrapper'sprototype
stores the property's default value.Because the
prototype
has set the value to default one, if the protobuf, does not contain value (it is null), the instance still has thevalue
property, which is not enumerable but it is accessible.The correct check is to ensure that the instance has its own property
value
and not a derived one.The current
_makeTransactionData
implementation hides the actual problem because it strips the value if it is not set at all, but the problem occurs when these values are explicitly set (correctly) to an object with avalue
property that can be undefined