-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 225
Support wildcard for ExposedHeaders option. #84
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
Open
yonderblue
wants to merge
1
commit into
rs:master
Choose a base branch
from
yonderblue:master
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Please do not wrap the response writer. This has the undesired side effect of hiding optional interfaces. Introducing this would silently break many code bases using package.
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.
Yes I have run into that many times, but never seen any good solutions. How do you suggest the headers that are set by the wrapped handler from cors.(*Cors).Handler() by caught to then be applied as they are in here?
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 don't think it's doable, but I'd rather give up on the feature than breaking many users of the lib.
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.
It is prevalent to wrap response writers for middleware of various kinds since there isn't another way to do this, and code that relies on optional interfaces to do a necessary thing (even necessary performance) seems like a bad idea in all the cases I have run across, so personally I would be hesitant to encourage that, but certainly it is a valid point.
If the caller has the opportunity to wrap themselves and make sure the interfaces they want are supported, would that be enough to ease the concern? I can add a field to the options of type http.ResponseWriter, and the caller can wrap the exported type here (rather than implementing it themselves), which also would make it an optional feature. However the argument could also be made that using AllowAll() is already optional ;)
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 do not agree. For some applications, those optional interfaces are the only way to go (think about flusher for instance). It is not the role of a library to encourage or discourage the way the http library is used. The lib must not break any application, or it will lose the trust of its users.
The support for wildcards with Access-Control-Expose-Headers will only increase. So I would prefer to just plan for that and not add tech dept to this lib.
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.
The problem brought up by @rs here is valid. The (non-exported) concrete type
http.response
used under the hood forhttp.ResponseWriter
in packagenet/http
does implement optional interfaces, such asio.StringWriter
. Here is a playground that illustrates the problem: https://go.dev/play/p/qCcef9K6cMP