Additional Vendor Extensions upgrades #1350
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
So we can deal with vendor extensions when the apparent type is Model or Property.
Helmsdown
changed the title
fehguy
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 11, 2015
…ensions Additional Vendor Extensions upgrades
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I forgot to add a vendor extension getter to the Model and Property interfaces. Without these it makes it annoying to write code that deals with vendor extensions because you must first cast to a AbstractModel/AbstractProperty to access the vendor extensions map.
Additionally, I did not account for the complexity of deserializing Properties (i.e. PropertyDeserializer and PropertyBuilder). As such, I had to add some logic to both classes to support deserializing vendor extensions. Please let me know if you know of a cleaner way of supporting this.
Finally, I added deserialization test for a Property with vendor extensions.
As always feedback on my code is appreciated.