-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 756
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.
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
Implement provider declaration aliasing #12127
Conversation
Test this change out locally with the following install scripts (Action run 6615863790) VSCode
Azure CLI
|
bb88dfe
to
bb3e086
Compare
4480e4e
to
16de1e3
Compare
16de1e3
to
0e2742d
Compare
src/Bicep.LangServer.IntegrationTests/Registry/ModuleRestoreSchedulerTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See comments
edf1af0
to
93bdd3b
Compare
93bdd3b
to
fa45b1a
Compare
|
||
return (name, version, true); | ||
var span = new TextSpan(stringSyntax.Span.Position + 1, unexpandedRepositoryAddress.Length); | ||
var unexpandedArtifactAddress = value.Replace('@', ':'); // we use the same format as module references so we can reuse module dispatcher logic. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is an interesting finding. I'm wondering if it's worth having a quick discussion on the pros/cons of having a syntax with @
to represent the version (clearer), vs having a syntax that fits with the existing module path resolution logic (familiar to existing users)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, it's a good point but I worry it's not in scope of this PR. Would you like me to do a write up and bring this up in the bicep discussions forum or do you prefer to do it given it's an insight you have identified?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, it's a good point but I worry it's not in scope of this PR.
Yeah I think it's fine to create a task to track.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good!
Overview
Implementation of #11598
Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow