Stuck on an issue?
Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Upgrading from 1.0.0 to 1.1.0 causes `"additionalProperties": false` to be dropped.
See original GitHub issueThis is a preliminary report.
I’ll investigate further to provide a simple repo case.
Using git bisect, the issue started with #1367
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created a year ago
- Comments:7 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Autocomplete bug with nested objects in arrays in the 1.0.0 ...
It looks, like reported issue is not fixed in 1.1.0. It is connected only to nested arrays. Let me show where is the...
Read more >Understanding JSON Schema
false means no additional properties will be allowed. ... Missing the required “email” property makes the JSON document invalid:.
Read more >Common Problems Found in RAML 1.0 API Specifications
Including undeclared properties in an example when additionalProperties is set to false. If an example for a type includes one or more properties...
Read more >JSON Schemas are your True Testing Friend - Cypress
We will start with version 1.0.0 . schema - the JSON Schema itself ... do not allow any extra properties additionalProperties: false, ...
Read more >@wikimedia/jsonschema-tools - npm
This allows you to modify a single schema file, update the version ... type: object additionalProperties: false # Use allOf so that common ......
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
@Jason3S Nice find, personally I think it makes sense to introduce a
HiddenType. However, I don’t know whether it will need special casing in other regions of the code. Also, you can omit thenot: {}in the return ofgetDefinitionasadditionalPropertiesisfalseanyway (and it just clutters the generated schema).Thanks for the fix