Modified logic for request condition validation to throw after determining all invalid conditions #22532
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
gapra-msft
requested review from
alzimmermsft,
amishra-dev,
jaschrep-msft,
kasobol-msft and
rickle-msft
as code owners
Comment on lines
512
to
535
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.LEASE_ID) | ||
| && requestConditions.getLeaseId() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'leaseId' is not applicable to this API.")); | ||
| invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.LEASE_ID.toString()); | ||
| } | ||
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.TAGS_CONDITIONS) | ||
| && requestConditions.getTagsConditions() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'tagsConditions' is not applicable to " | ||
| + "this API.")); | ||
| invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.TAGS_CONDITIONS.toString()); | ||
| } | ||
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_MODIFIED_SINCE) | ||
| && requestConditions.getIfModifiedSince() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'ifModifiedSince' is not applicable to " | ||
| + "this API.")); | ||
| invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_MODIFIED_SINCE.toString()); | ||
| } | ||
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_UNMODIFIED_SINCE) | ||
| && requestConditions.getIfUnmodifiedSince() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'ifUnmodifiedSince' is not applicable to " | ||
| + "this API.")); | ||
| invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_UNMODIFIED_SINCE.toString()); | ||
| } | ||
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_MATCH) | ||
| && requestConditions.getIfMatch() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'ifMatch' is not applicable to this API.")); | ||
| invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_MATCH.toString()); | ||
| } | ||
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_NONE_MATCH) | ||
| && requestConditions.getIfNoneMatch() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'ifNoneMatch' is not applicable to this " | ||
| + "API.")); | ||
| invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_NONE_MATCH.toString()); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How hot of a code path is this? Do we expect the general case for invalidConditions to be empty or very full? We may be able to make this a little more readable and get some perf depending on the answer to those questions. Avoiding calling contains() so often for a likely empty list is probably useful. IDK if this is more readable to you but it is to me. also we can flag missing enum cases as warnings if this expands later. (gihhub won't let me give a suggested edit here)
for (BlobRequestConditionProperty condition : invalidConditions) {
switch (condition) {
case LEASE_ID:
if (requestConditions.getLeaseId() != null) {
invalidConditionsFound.add(BlobRequestConditionProperty.LEASE_ID.toString());
}
break;
// other cases
}
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah that does look a lot better.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we care about perf then bitflags could be an option.
alzimmermsft
approved these changes
Jun 24, 2021
| if (invalidConditions.contains(BlobRequestConditionProperty.IF_MATCH) | ||
| && requestConditions.getIfMatch() != null) { | ||
| throw LOGGER.logExceptionAsError(new IllegalArgumentException("'ifMatch' is not applicable to this API.")); | ||
| List<String> invalidConditionsFound = new ArrayList<>(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
most people will get it right, i.e. there won't be invalid conditions in API call. eventually they have to - otherwise API won't work.
Might be good to initialize this list in if statements like we did in .net to avoid extra allocations.
kasobol-msft
approved these changes
Jun 24, 2021
seanmcc-msft
approved these changes
Jun 25, 2021
kasobol-msft
approved these changes
Jun 25, 2021
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.
No description provided.