-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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: field in super should not be interpreted with standalone-super concept. #154
Conversation
…oncept. Jsonnet spec defines special behavior for `super.field` and `field in super` expressions, while in jrsonnet it is implemented by standalone-super concept, with optimizations in case of `super.field`. However, standalone-super is conflicting with `field in super` behavior, so special handling is needed for this expression. Fixes: #153
Note that jrsonnet-specific value-path is not affected, and local upper = {
'bar': super?.baz ?? 'nope',
};
local obj = {
foo+: upper,
};
obj Already works as intended |
Oh, awesome -- i can confirm that this works, and removes the problem in our project ... 🎉 Now ... i does look like we may be hitting other problems further along in evaluation now, but ... this particular problem is solved 🥇 I'm currently staring at a stack overflow, but ... i'll open another issue for that, when i have a good reproduction case, if possible to figure that out. Thanks so much! edit: evaluation succeeds if i run it with |
All implementations, sjsonnet, jrsonnet and go-jsonnet/jsonnet-cpp (Those two match in that regard) have different stack frame assignment methods, so this is normal if jrsonnet fails with lower max-stack value. This is not necessary you have some things to fix at your side, just use larger max-stack value. |
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.
This is awesome! 🎉
For reference, this takes a ~120s evaluation down to ~15s ... but it has to be said that we're also removing a bunch of validation which we have natively available in our own build of go-jsonnet in this calculation ....
but anyways -- this gives us some food for tought 😄
Jrsonnet has great (If I say so) api for embedding, and Rust makes it very easy to write bug-free code, so you might consider writing your checking utilities in Rust Examples of jrsonnet embedding: I also plan to open-source my own jrsonnet wrapper with useful utilities (Jsonschema validation, by-url imports with integrated jsonnet-bundler, etc) based on my kubernetes deployment tool (Which is also closed-source right now, only very old prototype is available right now: https://github.com/CertainLach/hayasaka), so if you have any wanted features - you may suggest them here, and maybe I'll add jrsonnetx binary/jrsonnet-stdlibx library with those features included. |
json schema validation, and kubernetes manifest validation (we currently embed kubeconform) are the two big things we need right now … so — that would be very interesting indeed 😄 integrated jsonnet-bundler sounds intriguing ad well, our current vendoring solution is also quite problematic in a multitude of ways .. 🤣 |
Jsonnet spec defines special behavior for
super.field
andfield in super
expressions, while in jrsonnet it is implemented by standalone-super concept, with optimizations in case ofsuper.field
.However, standalone-super is conflicting with
field in super
behavior, so special handling is needed for this expression.Fixes: #153