Use different order of arguments for json merge#998
Merged
deepmap-marcinr merged 1 commit intooapi-codegen:masterfrom Mar 14, 2023
Merged
Use different order of arguments for json merge#998deepmap-marcinr merged 1 commit intooapi-codegen:masterfrom
deepmap-marcinr merged 1 commit intooapi-codegen:masterfrom
Conversation
adrianpk
pushed a commit
to foorester/oapi-codegen
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 16, 2024
adrianpk
added a commit
to foorester/oapi-codegen
that referenced
this pull request
May 31, 2024
danicc097
pushed a commit
to danicc097/oapi-codegen
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 31, 2024
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Taken from function documentation of
JsonMerge:First argument should be existing data, second argument the patch to be applied. This pull requests changes the order of the arguments passed into
JsonMergeand uses the union value as existing data. For me this sounds more reasonable, if the current implementation is intended I'd be happy to know the reasons why.