Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132

Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed

Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation

Conversation

@andrewparmet

@andrewparmetandrewparmet commented May 12, 2024•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

see #80

see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR

@CLAassistant

CLAassistant commented May 12, 2024•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@andrewparmetandrewparmet mentioned this pull request May 13, 2024
Merged
@andrewparmetandrewparmet changed the title introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed the enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation branch 3 times, most recently from 35bf1b7 to 7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren reviewed Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java Outdated
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java Outdated
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java Outdated
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java Outdated
return clazz.cast(value);
@Nullable
public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
return null;

@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?

Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?

@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.

See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.

@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java Outdated
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java Outdated
@andrewparmetandrewparmet changed the title Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2024
Closed
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed the enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation branch from 88684a4 to 5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet mentioned this pull request Oct 27, 2024
Closed
andrewparmet added a commit to open-toast/protokt that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();

Skip to content
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes - #132
Closed
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Closed
Introduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimes#132
andrewparmet wants to merge 0 commit into
bufbuild:mainfrom 
andrewparmet:enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
Conversation
@andrewparmet
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
see #80
see open-toast/protokt@0cd3157 for what the implementation looks like given this PR
@CLAassistant
CLAassistant
commented
May 12, 2024•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
May 13, 2024
 Merged

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesMay 30, 2024
@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
3 times, most recently
from
35bf1b7 to
7928e60CompareMay 30, 2024 04:21
pkwarren
pkwarren
reviewed
Jun 12, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/EnumEvaluator.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageLike.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/MessageValue.java
Outdated

 return clazz.cast(value);
 @Nullable
 public <T> T jvmValue(Class<T> clazz) {
 return null;
@pkwarrenpkwarrenJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this not used by anyone? Could we not keep it returning the underlying Message as before?
Do we need to make smaller interfaces and only implement jvmValue on Value types that provide a valid implementation?
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Correct, this is not used. jvmValue is used for fields that protovalidate-java validates directly itself, like enums (as opposed to passing into CEL), and right now it does not do any validation on message types.
See also the changed doc on Value.jvmValue.
@andrewparmetandrewparmetJun 12, 2024

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

But even if it did, it doesn't make much sense to cast the message type to anything, does it? This hints at the narrower interface you mention.
Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

Comment threadsrc/main/java/build/buf/protovalidate/internal/evaluator/ObjectValue.java
Outdated

@andrewparmetandrewparmet
changed the title
Introduce MessageLike to enable alternative protobuf runtimesIntroduce MessageReflector to enable alternative protobuf runtimesJun 22, 2024
@friscoMadfriscoMad
mentioned this pull request
Jul 10, 2024
 Closed

@andrewparmet
andrewparmetforce-pushed
the
enable-lazy-protokt-evaluation
branch
from
88684a4 to
5efed01CompareOctober 27, 2024 16:06
@andrewparmetandrewparmet
mentioned this pull request
Oct 27, 2024
 Closed

andrewparmet added a commit
to open-toast/protokt
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 20, 2024
@andrewparmet
Support protovalidate validation (#259)
db30a7d
Right now the validator eagerly converts the protokt message to a protobuf DynamicMessage. With bufbuild/protovalidate-java#132, this can [change to supply a wrapper](0cd3157) around the protokt message that only converts as requested by the validator.
Not sure if this module belongs at the top level or in third-party. In that case, maybe the gRPC modules also belong in third-party. For example, supposing protokt one day supports the [Connect](https://connectrpc.com/) protocol, that would also go in third-party, but it feels like a sibling to gRPC.
Fixes#207.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pkwarrenpkwarrenpkwarren left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@andrewparmet@CLAassistant@pkwarren