fix: ensure the sarif output has a stable order #938
Conversation
| for _, fn := range []func() int{ | ||
| func() int { return strings.Compare(a.Source.Path, b.Source.Path) }, | ||
| func() int { return strings.Compare(a.Package.Name, b.Package.Name) }, | ||
| func() int { return strings.Compare(a.Package.Version, b.Package.Version) }, | ||
| } { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm super on the fence about this: on the one hand its clever, but on the other maybe it's too clever?
I've got a commit locally that unwinds this into if statements which I can push up if folks agree it's too clever
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's easier to parse than if statements once you understand what it's doing, can you just add a comment above it basically describing it's just sorting by each field in descending priority.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sweet done - one other annoying downside though is that we can't cover the return 0 😞
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok turns out there's a nwm its go 1.22 onlycmp.Or for exactly this - it's technically less efficient because it's not lazy (though there's a proposal for that), but these compares should be pretty inexpensive and its nice to remove the unreachable code path
| for _, fn := range []func() int{ | ||
| func() int { return strings.Compare(a.Source.Path, b.Source.Path) }, | ||
| func() int { return strings.Compare(a.Package.Name, b.Package.Name) }, | ||
| func() int { return strings.Compare(a.Package.Version, b.Package.Version) }, | ||
| } { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's easier to parse than if statements once you understand what it's doing, can you just add a comment above it basically describing it's just sorting by each field in descending priority.
G-Rath
force-pushed
the
fix-sarif
branch
3 times, most recently
from
6e3020f
to
35ea85d
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #938 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 63.58% 63.57% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 146 146
Lines 11922 11933 +11
==========================================
+ Hits 7581 7586 +5
- Misses 3875 3881 +6
Partials 466 466 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
The coverage drop is fine - we were not covering the original code anyway, and it will be covered by #937, after which just the final |
This stabilizes the order in the SARIF output so that it is deterministic, as google#937 proved it was not.
These got included in google#938 even though they're for google#937 and it seems that `go-snaps` does not error about this even though it will clean them up if run with `UPDATE_SNAPS=clean`.
This stabilizes the order in the SARIF output so that it is deterministic, as #937 proved it was not.