Skip to content

Use server symbol provider in protocol test gen #284

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

Conversation

JordonPhillips
Copy link
Contributor

@JordonPhillips JordonPhillips commented Mar 12, 2021

This updates the server protocol test gen to use the server symbol provider. It also splits up the server / client "command" generators because having them all in one was causing client code to be generated in the server files. Lastly, I changed the folder for the server operation types to "operation" since typescript special cases "types" and that was causing generation issues.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

@JordonPhillips JordonPhillips force-pushed the update-ssdk-request-tests branch from c26e756 to 59edca7 Compare March 12, 2021 14:18
@JordonPhillips
Copy link
Contributor Author

I discovered some issues with the symbol provider change that make this impossible to test, so closing this for now until I get that resolved.

@JordonPhillips JordonPhillips force-pushed the update-ssdk-request-tests branch from 3fcd287 to 976711c Compare March 15, 2021 15:46
/**
* Generates server operation types.
*/
final class ServerCommandGenerator implements Runnable {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't like the association of the term command with this at all (but no, I don't have a better idea off the top of my head)

@JordonPhillips JordonPhillips merged commit cbcc084 into smithy-lang:ssdk Mar 15, 2021
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