add tracestate module and record #607
Conversation
tsloughter
force-pushed
the
tracestate-support
branch
from
8b13e5e to
3005df9
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #607 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 72.26% 72.54% +0.27%
==========================================
Files 60 61 +1
Lines 1904 1923 +19
==========================================
+ Hits 1376 1395 +19
Misses 528 528
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
tracestate is now a record with members element which are validated when added to the tracestate.
tsloughter
force-pushed
the
tracestate-support
branch
from
3005df9 to
e4c2c10
Compare
| %% for the limits and string requirements that make up the regexes | ||
| -define(MAX_MEMBERS, 32). | ||
| -define(KEY_MP, element(2, re:compile("^([a-z][_0-9a-z\-\*\/]{0,255})|([a-z0-9][_0-9a-z-*/]{0,240}@[a-z][_0-9a-z-*/]{0,13})$"))). | ||
| -define(VALUE_MP, element(2, re:compile("^([ -+--<>-~]{0,255}[!-+--<>-~])$"))). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not a blocker here, but since you use ?KEY_MP and ?VALUE_MP directly in the calls, I believe the recompilation will happen every time and provide limited benefits.
I realize this is code moved from another module and not a blocker, but I wanted to point it out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ugh. Should I replace it with like:
-define(VALUE_MP, {re_pattern,1,0,0,
<<69,82,67,80,152,0,0,0,16,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,255,255,255,
255,255,255,255,255,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,64,0,0,0,0,0,
0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,131,0,
84,27,133,0,76,0,1,110,0,0,0,0,255,239,255,223,255,
255,255,255,255,255,255,127,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,
0,0,0,104,0,0,0,255,110,0,0,0,0,254,239,255,223,255,
255,255,255,255,255,255,127,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,
0,0,0,120,0,76,25,120,0,84,0>>}).
No idea how often or what versions that would break on. Maybe rare to never?
| parse_pairs([Pair | Rest], Acc) -> | ||
| case split(string:trim(Pair)) of | ||
| {K, V} -> | ||
| case re:run(K, ?KEY_MP) =/= nomatch |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
given what was pointed out earlier, it may make more sense to pass ?KEY_MP and ?VALUE_MP as parameters to this function so they're compiled once per list, particularly if there's no other caching (pdict or persistent terms) to save the easy re-compiling at each iteration.
tsloughter
force-pushed
the
tracestate-support
branch
from
0aa5d33 to
877866a
Compare
tsloughter
force-pushed
the
tracestate-support
branch
from
877866a to
3014e30
Compare
tracestate is now a record with members element which are validated when added to the tracestate.