This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 6, 2026. It is now read-only.
client, test case, discriminator value type as enum#2599
Merged
weidongxu-microsoft merged 3 commits intoMar 6, 2024
Merged
Conversation
Comment on lines
+41
to
+43
| public DogKind getKind() { | ||
| return this.kind; | ||
| } |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can see, even with Swagger, the return value is still an enum (when Swagger defines it as enum).
XiaofeiCao
approved these changes
Mar 6, 2024
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A case for Swagger, on discriminator value type as enum.
swagger from https://cadlplayground.z22.web.core.windows.net/cadl-azure/?c=aW1wb3J0ICJAdHlwZXNwZWMvaHR0cCI7CskZYXp1cmUtdG9vbHMvyCUtxhVjb3JlIjsKCnVzaW5nIFR5cGVTcGVjLkh0dHA7xxVBxCkuQ29yZTsKCkBzZXJ2aWNlKHt0aXRsZTogIkVudW1EaXNjcmltaW5hdG9yIn0pCm5hbWVzcGFjZcVTLk1vZGVsLkluaGVyaXRhbmNlLtE2xFxkb2MoImV4dGVuc2libGUgZW51bSDkALEgZm9yIGTNZSkKdW5pb24gRG9nS2luZCB7CiAgc3RyaW5nLAoKICDGTOQAzGllcyBnb2xkZW4iKQogIEfFCzogIscULAp9yHpUZXN0IN9%2Fyn9AzREoImtpbmQiKQpt5ADr5ACW5QCSxlnNKiBwcm9wZXJ0eeUAj8Q2OugAxTvqALpXZWlnaHQgb2YgdGhlIGRvZ8Uud8UWOiBpbnQzMjvqALrmANXEJyDlAIDpAIjHGeUA1WRz%2FwCX%2BACXLsZGxnByb3V0ZSgiL%2BoBKC3kASjkARFnZXQKb3AgZ2V0Rckd5QH6KCnFTDsK&e=%40azure-tools%2Ftypespec-autorest&options=%7B%7D
The typescript part of the emitter didn't do anything special about typespec. It just try to make a same code-model.yaml.