Feat: respect gogoproto nullable #2
Conversation
| @@ -312,6 +362,96 @@ pub fn serde_alias_id_with_uppercased(s: ItemStruct) -> ItemStruct { | |||
| syn::ItemStruct { fields, ..s } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| fn is_field_gogoproto_nullable( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
please move it after pub funcs
| false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pub fn respect_gogoproto_nullable( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if we can have tests for it. would be nice to get to know if some of this fragile logic breaks because of either ours or counterparty's changes to proto tags or GOGOPROTO_NULLABLE_EXTENSION_FIELD_NUMBER or something else. for example, apply serialization/deserialization on several proto messages taken from different sources and make sure the results re optionality are as expected
There was a problem hiding this comment.
apply serialization/deserialization on several proto messages taken from different sources and make sure the results re optionality are as expected
I don't get it, could you elaborate? What exactly do you want to test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd like to have some tests that would cover proto-to-rust code generation in terms of gogoproto_nullable with verification of the end rust struct fields optionality. ideally end-to-end tests with different (from different sources e.g. neutron, cosmos-sdk, osmosis, etc.) proto messages as input and rust structure fields assertion (gogoproto_nullable fields are optional, other are required). that could be done as a separate task. what do you think?
| @@ -151,12 +154,14 @@ fn transform_items( | |||
| let s = transformers::add_derive_eq_struct(&s); | |||
| let s = transformers::append_attrs_struct(src, &s, descriptor); | |||
| let s = transformers::serde_alias_id_with_uppercased(s); | |||
| let s = transformers::respect_gogoproto_nullable(s, descriptor); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since structures are always optional as a result of rust proto generation (e.g. this field is not supposed to be optional), I wonder if it's possible to do the opposite: make structs optional only if there is a gogoproto_nullable set, and make them required otherwise?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm sure it's possible, but it's out of scope. Could you create a task for that?
Currently rust protobuf libraries do not respect
gogoproto.nullableoption in proto files, thus some fields are required i generated rust code, but go has a different behaviour.This PR solves this problem in a kinda dirty way, but it does solve it
Related PRs: