Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fix: change escaping char #87

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 10, 2023
Merged

fix: change escaping char #87

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e6372d8
fix: change escaping char
eddycharly Oct 9, 2023
6fa97a6
Merge branch 'main' into escape
eddycharly Oct 10, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 6 additions & 6 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ foo:
```

Here the `(bar)` key conflict with the projection syntax used.
To workaround this issue, you can escape a projection by surrounding it with `/` characters like this:
To workaround this issue, you can escape a projection by surrounding it with `\` characters like this:

```yaml
apiVersion: json.kyverno.io/v1alpha1
Expand All @@ -344,17 +344,17 @@ spec:
assert:
all:
- foo:
/(bar)/: 10
\(bar)\: 10
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is the trailing \ necessary?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, to escape the binding

```

In this case, the leading and trailing `/` characters will be erased and the projection won't be applied.
In this case, the leading and trailing `\` characters will be erased and the projection won't be applied.

Note that it's still possible to use the `~` modifier or to create a named binding with and escaped projection.

Keys like this are perfectly valid:
- `~index./baz/`
- `/baz/@foo`
- `~index./baz/@foo`
- `~index.\baz\`
- `\baz\@foo`
- `~index.\baz\@foo`

## SDK

Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion pkg/engine/assert/expression.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ import (
var (
foreachRegex = regexp.MustCompile(`^~(\w+)?\.(.*)`)
bindingRegex = regexp.MustCompile(`(.*)@(\w+)$`)
escapeRegex = regexp.MustCompile(`^/(.+)/$`)
escapeRegex = regexp.MustCompile(`^\\(.+)\\$`)
engineRegex = regexp.MustCompile(`^\((?:(\w+):)?(.+)\)$`)
)

Expand Down
12 changes: 6 additions & 6 deletions pkg/engine/assert/expression_test.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ func Test_parseExpressionRegex(t *testing.T) {
},
}, {
name: "escape",
in: "/~(test)@foo/",
in: `\~(test)@foo\`,
want: &expression{
foreach: false,
foreachName: "",
Expand All @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ func Test_parseExpressionRegex(t *testing.T) {
},
}, {
name: "escape",
in: "/test/",
in: `\test\`,
want: &expression{
foreach: false,
foreachName: "",
Expand All @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ func Test_parseExpressionRegex(t *testing.T) {
},
}, {
name: "escape",
in: "/(test)/",
in: `\(test)\`,
want: &expression{
foreach: false,
foreachName: "",
Expand All @@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ func Test_parseExpressionRegex(t *testing.T) {
},
}, {
name: "escape",
in: "//test//",
in: `\/test/\`,
want: &expression{
foreach: false,
foreachName: "",
Expand All @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ func Test_parseExpressionRegex(t *testing.T) {
},
}, {
name: "escape",
in: "~index./(test)/",
in: `~index.\(test)\`,
want: &expression{
foreach: true,
foreachName: "index",
Expand All @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ func Test_parseExpressionRegex(t *testing.T) {
},
}, {
name: "escape",
in: "~index./(test)/@name",
in: `~index.\(test)\@name`,
want: &expression{
foreach: true,
foreachName: "index",
Expand Down
10 changes: 5 additions & 5 deletions testdata/escaped/policy.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,17 +9,17 @@ spec:
assert:
all:
- foo:
/(bar)/: 4
\(bar)\: 4
- foo:
/(bar)/@test:
\(bar)\@test:
($test): 4
- foo:
/(bar)@test/: 6
\(bar)@test\: 6
- foo:
/(bar)@test/@test:
\(bar)@test\@test:
($test): 6
- foo:
/~foos/:
\~foos\:
- 1
- 2
- 3
12 changes: 6 additions & 6 deletions website/docs/policies/escaping.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ foo:
```

Here the `(bar)` key conflict with the projection syntax.
To workaround this situation, you can escape a projection by surrounding it with `/` characters like this:
To workaround this situation, you can escape a projection by surrounding it with `\` characters like this:

```yaml
apiVersion: json.kyverno.io/v1alpha1
Expand All @@ -28,15 +28,15 @@ spec:
assert:
all:
- foo:
/(bar)/: 10
\(bar)\: 10
```

In this case, the leading and trailing `/` characters will be erased and the projection won't be applied.
In this case, the leading and trailing `\` characters will be erased and the projection won't be applied.

Note that it's still possible to use the `~` modifier or to create a named binding with and escaped projection.

Keys like this are perfectly valid:

- `~index./baz/`
- `/baz/@foo`
- `~index./baz/@foo`
- `~index.\baz\`
- `\baz\@foo`
- `~index.\baz\@foo`
Loading