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

Update CBOR to always have an accept header #219

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Oct 18, 2024
Merged

Update CBOR to always have an accept header #219

merged 9 commits into from
Oct 18, 2024

Conversation

mullermp
Copy link
Contributor

Needs to update Smithy and test against protocol tests.

Copy link
Contributor

@alextwoods alextwoods left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good.

Worth adding a changelog entry for?

@mullermp
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes. Still needs Smithy update.

@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
Unreleased Changes
------------------

* Issue - Support services migrating from AWS Query to AWS JSON or RPC v2.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This AWS specific bit is kind of weird to have in our generic changelog.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah. I can change this "from AWS Query to RPC v2" - the query trait (AWS) is used generically now so that bit must stay.

TreeSet<Shape> shapesToRender = CodegenUtils.getAlphabeticalOrderedShapesSet();
TreeSet<Shape> eventStreamEventsToRender = CodegenUtils.getAlphabeticalOrderedShapesSet();

Comparator<Shape> comparator = Comparator.comparing(o -> o.getId().getName() + " " + o.getId());
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why this change? The codegenutils helper method for this seems cleaner than implementing a comparator for each one?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It was the only method in the utility after unused methods cleaned up. It felt weird and was used in 3 classes. I think it's fine to duplicate it here as we've effectively duplicated the same logic for iterating shapes.

@mullermp mullermp merged commit 050b1fb into main Oct 18, 2024
8 of 9 checks passed
@mullermp mullermp deleted the cbor-accept branch October 18, 2024 18:05
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