Skip to content
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

Workaround wasm build error #1288

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

john-h-kastner-aws
Copy link
Contributor

@john-h-kastner-aws john-h-kastner-aws commented Oct 23, 2024

Description of changes

Workaround rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#4207 by applying fix proposed in rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#4210 with a sed script.

This fix is a bit hacky, so we might prefer leaving the WASM build broken until this gets fixed in wasm-bindgen.

Issue #, if available

Checklist for requesting a review

The change in this PR is (choose one, and delete the other options):

  • A breaking change requiring a major version bump to cedar-policy (e.g., changes to the signature of an existing API).
  • A backwards-compatible change requiring a minor version bump to cedar-policy (e.g., addition of a new API).
  • A bug fix or other functionality change requiring a patch to cedar-policy.
  • A change "invisible" to users (e.g., documentation, changes to "internal" crates like cedar-policy-core, cedar-validator, etc.)
  • A change (breaking or otherwise) that only impacts unreleased or experimental code.

I confirm that this PR (choose one, and delete the other options):

  • Updates the "Unreleased" section of the CHANGELOG with a description of my change (required for major/minor version bumps).
  • Does not update the CHANGELOG because my change does not significantly impact released code.

I confirm that cedar-spec (choose one, and delete the other options):

  • Does not require updates because my change does not impact the Cedar formal model or DRT infrastructure.
  • Requires updates, and I have made / will make these updates myself. (Please include in your description a timeline or link to the relevant PR in cedar-spec, and how you have tested that your updates are correct.)
  • Requires updates, but I do not plan to make them in the near future. (Make sure that your changes are hidden behind a feature flag to mark them as experimental.)
  • I'm not sure how my change impacts cedar-spec. (Post your PR anyways, and we'll discuss in the comments.)

I confirm that docs.cedarpolicy.com (choose one, and delete the other options):

  • Does not require updates because my change does not impact the Cedar language specification.
  • Requires updates, and I have made / will make these updates myself. (Please include in your description a timeline or link to the relevant PR in cedar-docs. PRs should be targeted at a staging-X.Y branch, not main.)
  • I'm not sure how my change impacts the documentation. (Post your PR anyways, and we'll discuss in the comments.)

Signed-off-by: John Kastner <jkastner@amazon.com>
Copy link
Contributor

@adpaco-aws adpaco-aws left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How do we make sure we go back to this and remove the patch when the wasm-bindgen issue is fixed?

@@ -84,6 +84,9 @@ process_types_file() {
s/{[[:space:]]*\.: /{ ".": /g
s/ | __skip//g
s/ { .*: __skip } |//g
# Workaround for wasm-bindgen issue resulting in malformed return type Array
# without generic paramter. See https://github.com/rustwasm/wasm-bindgen/issues/4207
s/[[:space:]]Array;/ number[];/g
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need to patch just once? If so, maybe we should make sure this is being replaced only once or have a more focused way to apply the patch.

@john-h-kastner-aws
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've decided I like #1291 better, and it seems to pass CI, so I'll close this

@john-h-kastner-aws john-h-kastner-aws deleted the fix-wasm-build branch October 31, 2024 19:07
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.

3 participants