Bugfix: Prefix generated static variables to avoid reserved keyword clashing#559
Closed
mcos wants to merge 1 commit intoprotobufjs:masterfrom
Closed
Bugfix: Prefix generated static variables to avoid reserved keyword clashing#559mcos wants to merge 1 commit intoprotobufjs:masterfrom
mcos wants to merge 1 commit intoprotobufjs:masterfrom
Conversation
Member
|
There are a few issues with this:
|
dcodeIO
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2016
Member
|
Does this fix it? |
Author
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 noticed earlier while playing around with this library that if a protobuf file namespace has reserved keywords, then a variables are generated with reserved keyword names. Importing the file then causes errors.
Compiling this and
requiringit gives the following:To get around this, I simply prefixed the generated variable name with
$, which seemed to be in keeping with the conventions of this library. These variables are generated within closures, so they are not assigned anywhere that they may be accessed by a consumer of the generated code.I understand that this fix may be over-simplified, so I'm happy to work on a better solution than this. I also understand that there are no tests for this module yet, but if some were added, I'd be happy to contribute a test case for this.