Skip to content

Implement getField CEL function #290

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 23, 2025
Merged

Implement getField CEL function #290

merged 2 commits into from
Apr 23, 2025

Conversation

jchadwick-buf
Copy link
Member

I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the in identifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this sort of functionality to be added in at runtime.

Protovalidate PR: bufbuild/protovalidate#352

I'm proposing this as an eventual replacement (before 1.0) of our hack around the fact that the `in` identifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this sort of functionality to be added in at runtime.
@jchadwick-buf jchadwick-buf marked this pull request as ready for review April 22, 2025 06:57
jchadwick-buf added a commit to bufbuild/protovalidate that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2025
This is a proposal to remove our hack around the fact the `in`
identifier is reserved in CEL. This is especially urgent for
protovalidate-cc which is currently carrying patches to the CEL
implementation in order to enable it, since cel-cpp doesn't allow this
sort of functionality to be added in at runtime.

Runtime PRs:
- Go: bufbuild/protovalidate-go#225
- C++: bufbuild/protovalidate-cc#90
- Python: bufbuild/protovalidate-python#290
- Java: bufbuild/protovalidate-java#271
@jchadwick-buf jchadwick-buf merged commit 3a35cc4 into main Apr 23, 2025
12 checks passed
@jchadwick-buf jchadwick-buf deleted the jchadwick/getfield branch April 23, 2025 16:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants