pulumi/sdk/nodejs/proto/provider_pb.js

3714 lines
111 KiB
JavaScript
Raw Normal View History

/**
* @fileoverview
* @enhanceable
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {messageConventions} JS Compiler reports an error if a variable or
* field starts with 'MSG_' and isn't a translatable message.
* @public
*/
// GENERATED CODE -- DO NOT EDIT!
var jspb = require('google-protobuf');
var goog = jspb;
var global = Function('return this')();
var plugin_pb = require('./plugin_pb.js');
var google_protobuf_empty_pb = require('google-protobuf/google/protobuf/empty_pb.js');
var google_protobuf_struct_pb = require('google-protobuf/google/protobuf/struct_pb.js');
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest', null, global);
goog.exportSymbol('proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse', null, global);
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
variablesMap: (f = msg.getVariablesMap()) ? f.toObject(includeInstance, undefined) : []
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = msg.getVariablesMap();
reader.readMessage(value, function(message, reader) {
jspb.Map.deserializeBinary(message, reader, jspb.BinaryReader.prototype.readString, jspb.BinaryReader.prototype.readString);
});
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getVariablesMap(true);
if (f && f.getLength() > 0) {
f.serializeBinary(1, writer, jspb.BinaryWriter.prototype.writeString, jspb.BinaryWriter.prototype.writeString);
}
};
/**
* map<string, string> variables = 1;
* @param {boolean=} opt_noLazyCreate Do not create the map if
* empty, instead returning `undefined`
* @return {!jspb.Map<string,string>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.getVariablesMap = function(opt_noLazyCreate) {
return /** @type {!jspb.Map<string,string>} */ (
jspb.Message.getMapField(this, 1, opt_noLazyCreate,
null));
};
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureRequest.prototype.clearVariablesMap = function() {
this.getVariablesMap().clear();
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.repeatedFields_, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys';
}
/**
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
* @private {!Array<number>}
* @const
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.repeatedFields_ = [1];
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
missingkeysList: jspb.Message.toObjectList(msg.getMissingkeysList(),
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.toObject, includeInstance)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys;
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey;
reader.readMessage(value,proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.addMissingkeys(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getMissingkeysList();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeRepeatedMessage(
1,
f,
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
name: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
description: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, "")
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey;
return proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setName(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setDescription(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getName();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getDescription();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
2,
f
);
}
};
/**
* optional string name = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.getName = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.setName = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional string description = 2;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.getDescription = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey.prototype.setDescription = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
};
/**
* repeated MissingKey missingKeys = 1;
* @return {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.getMissingkeysList = function() {
return /** @type{!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey>} */ (
jspb.Message.getRepeatedWrapperField(this, proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey, 1));
};
/** @param {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey>} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.setMissingkeysList = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setRepeatedWrapperField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey=} opt_value
* @param {number=} opt_index
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.addMissingkeys = function(opt_value, opt_index) {
return jspb.Message.addToRepeatedWrapperField(this, 1, opt_value, proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.MissingKey, opt_index);
};
proto.pulumirpc.ConfigureErrorMissingKeys.prototype.clearMissingkeysList = function() {
this.setMissingkeysList([]);
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
tok: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
Implement first-class providers. (#1695) ### First-Class Providers These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the outputs of other resources. ### Provider Plugin Changes In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider configuration and configure providers without complete configuration information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and `DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`. These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then, these methods are implemented by adapters: - `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins only accept string-typed configuration values. - `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is unknown. The justification for this behavior is given [here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106) - `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we can manage with the existing gRPC interface. ### Resource Model Changes Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created, may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not yet been physically created and therefore have no ID. All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically sorting the dependency graph. Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the invocation via a provider reference. ### Engine Changes First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine: - The engine must have some way to map from provider references to provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider resources. - In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data. The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the "provider provider"). The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to plan setup and the eval source. During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default provider for its package. While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration, resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is used and no new registration occurs. ### SDK Changes These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK. - A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used to instantiate first-class providers. - A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD operations. - A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type includes a `provider` field that is analogous to `ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
args: (f = msg.getArgs()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
provider: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 3, "")
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setTok(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setArgs(value);
break;
Implement first-class providers. (#1695) ### First-Class Providers These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the outputs of other resources. ### Provider Plugin Changes In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider configuration and configure providers without complete configuration information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and `DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`. These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then, these methods are implemented by adapters: - `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins only accept string-typed configuration values. - `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is unknown. The justification for this behavior is given [here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106) - `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we can manage with the existing gRPC interface. ### Resource Model Changes Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created, may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not yet been physically created and therefore have no ID. All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically sorting the dependency graph. Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the invocation via a provider reference. ### Engine Changes First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine: - The engine must have some way to map from provider references to provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider resources. - In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data. The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the "provider provider"). The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to plan setup and the eval source. During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default provider for its package. While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration, resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is used and no new registration occurs. ### SDK Changes These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK. - A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used to instantiate first-class providers. - A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD operations. - A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type includes a `provider` field that is analogous to `ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
case 3:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setProvider(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getTok();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getArgs();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
2,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
Implement first-class providers. (#1695) ### First-Class Providers These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the outputs of other resources. ### Provider Plugin Changes In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider configuration and configure providers without complete configuration information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and `DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`. These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then, these methods are implemented by adapters: - `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins only accept string-typed configuration values. - `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is unknown. The justification for this behavior is given [here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106) - `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we can manage with the existing gRPC interface. ### Resource Model Changes Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created, may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not yet been physically created and therefore have no ID. All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically sorting the dependency graph. Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the invocation via a provider reference. ### Engine Changes First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine: - The engine must have some way to map from provider references to provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider resources. - In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data. The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the "provider provider"). The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to plan setup and the eval source. During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default provider for its package. While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration, resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is used and no new registration occurs. ### SDK Changes These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK. - A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used to instantiate first-class providers. - A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD operations. - A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type includes a `provider` field that is analogous to `ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
f = message.getProvider();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
3,
f
);
}
};
/**
* optional string tok = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.getTok = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.setTok = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct args = 2;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.getArgs = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.setArgs = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.clearArgs = function() {
this.setArgs(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.hasArgs = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
};
Implement first-class providers. (#1695) ### First-Class Providers These changes implement support for first-class providers. First-class providers are provider plugins that are exposed as resources via the Pulumi programming model so that they may be explicitly and multiply instantiated. Each instance of a provider resource may be configured differently, and configuration parameters may be source from the outputs of other resources. ### Provider Plugin Changes In order to accommodate the need to verify and diff provider configuration and configure providers without complete configuration information, these changes adjust the high-level provider plugin interface. Two new methods for validating a provider's configuration and diffing changes to the same have been added (`CheckConfig` and `DiffConfig`, respectively), and the type of the configuration bag accepted by `Configure` has been changed to a `PropertyMap`. These changes have not yet been reflected in the provider plugin gRPC interface. We will do this in a set of follow-up changes. Until then, these methods are implemented by adapters: - `CheckConfig` validates that all configuration parameters are string or unknown properties. This is necessary because existing plugins only accept string-typed configuration values. - `DiffConfig` either returns "never replace" if all configuration values are known or "must replace" if any configuration value is unknown. The justification for this behavior is given [here](https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/pull/1695/files#diff-a6cd5c7f337665f5bb22e92ca5f07537R106) - `Configure` converts the config bag to a legacy config map and configures the provider plugin if all config values are known. If any config value is unknown, the underlying plugin is not configured and the provider may only perform `Check`, `Read`, and `Invoke`, all of which return empty results. We justify this behavior becuase it is only possible during a preview and provides the best experience we can manage with the existing gRPC interface. ### Resource Model Changes Providers are now exposed as resources that participate in a stack's dependency graph. Like other resources, they are explicitly created, may have multiple instances, and may have dependencies on other resources. Providers are referred to using provider references, which are a combination of the provider's URN and its ID. This design addresses the need during a preview to refer to providers that have not yet been physically created and therefore have no ID. All custom resources that are not themselves providers must specify a single provider via a provider reference. The named provider will be used to manage that resource's CRUD operations. If a resource's provider reference changes, the resource must be replaced. Though its URN is not present in the resource's dependency list, the provider should be treated as a dependency of the resource when topologically sorting the dependency graph. Finally, `Invoke` operations must now specify a provider to use for the invocation via a provider reference. ### Engine Changes First-class providers support requires a few changes to the engine: - The engine must have some way to map from provider references to provider plugins. It must be possible to add providers from a stack's checkpoint to this map and to register new/updated providers during the execution of a plan in response to CRUD operations on provider resources. - In order to support updating existing stacks using existing Pulumi programs that may not explicitly instantiate providers, the engine must be able to manage the "default" providers for each package referenced by a checkpoint or Pulumi program. The configuration for a "default" provider is taken from the stack's configuration data. The former need is addressed by adding a provider registry type that is responsible for managing all of the plugins required by a plan. In addition to loading plugins froma checkpoint and providing the ability to map from a provider reference to a provider plugin, this type serves as the provider plugin for providers themselves (i.e. it is the "provider provider"). The latter need is solved via two relatively self-contained changes to plan setup and the eval source. During plan setup, the old checkpoint is scanned for custom resources that do not have a provider reference in order to compute the set of packages that require a default provider. Once this set has been computed, the required default provider definitions are conjured and prepended to the checkpoint's resource list. Each resource that requires a default provider is then updated to refer to the default provider for its package. While an eval source is running, each custom resource registration, resource read, and invoke that does not name a provider is trapped before being returned by the source iterator. If no default provider for the appropriate package has been registered, the eval source synthesizes an appropriate registration, waits for it to complete, and records the registered provider's reference. This reference is injected into the original request, which is then processed as usual. If a default provider was already registered, the recorded reference is used and no new registration occurs. ### SDK Changes These changes only expose first-class providers from the Node.JS SDK. - A new abstract class, `ProviderResource`, can be subclassed and used to instantiate first-class providers. - A new field in `ResourceOptions`, `provider`, can be used to supply a particular provider instance to manage a `CustomResource`'s CRUD operations. - A new type, `InvokeOptions`, can be used to specify options that control the behavior of a call to `pulumi.runtime.invoke`. This type includes a `provider` field that is analogous to `ResourceOptions.provider`.
2018-08-07 00:50:29 +00:00
/**
* optional string provider = 3;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.getProvider = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 3, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeRequest.prototype.setProvider = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 3, value);
};
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.repeatedFields_, null);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse, jspb.Message);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse';
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
}
/**
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
* @private {!Array<number>}
* @const
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.repeatedFields_ = [2];
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var f, obj = {
pb_return: (f = msg.getReturn()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
failuresList: jspb.Message.toObjectList(msg.getFailuresList(),
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject, includeInstance)
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse;
return proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setReturn(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure;
reader.readMessage(value,proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.addFailures(value);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse} message
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var f = undefined;
f = message.getReturn();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
1,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
);
}
f = message.getFailuresList();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeRepeatedMessage(
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
2,
f,
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
);
}
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct return = 1;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.getReturn = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 1));
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.setReturn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 1, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.clearReturn = function() {
this.setReturn(undefined);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.hasReturn = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 1) != null;
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* repeated CheckFailure failures = 2;
* @return {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.getFailuresList = function() {
return /** @type{!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} */ (
jspb.Message.getRepeatedWrapperField(this, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, 2));
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/** @param {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} value */
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.setFailuresList = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, value);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure=} opt_value
* @param {number=} opt_index
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.addFailures = function(opt_value, opt_index) {
return jspb.Message.addToRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, opt_value, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, opt_index);
};
proto.pulumirpc.InvokeResponse.prototype.clearFailuresList = function() {
this.setFailuresList([]);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest = function(opt_data) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest, jspb.Message);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest';
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var f, obj = {
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
olds: (f = msg.getOlds()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
news: (f = msg.getNews()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setUrn(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setOlds(value);
break;
case 3:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setNews(value);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest} message
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
var f = undefined;
f = message.getUrn();
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getOlds();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
2,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
f = message.getNews();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
3,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* optional string urn = 1;
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct olds = 2;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.getOlds = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.setOlds = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.clearOlds = function() {
this.setOlds(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.hasOlds = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct news = 3;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.getNews = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.setNews = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.clearNews = function() {
this.setNews(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckRequest.prototype.hasNews = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
};
Redo object monikers This change overhauls the way we do object monikers. The old mechanism, generating monikers using graph paths, was far too brittle and prone to collisions. The new approach mixes some amount of "automatic scoping" plus some "explicit naming." Although there is some explicitness, this is arguably a good thing, as the monikers will be relatable back to the source more readily by developers inspecting the graph and resource state. Each moniker has four parts: <Namespace>::<AllocModule>::<Type>::<Name> wherein each element is the following: <Namespace> The namespace being deployed into <AllocModule> The module in which the object was allocated <Type> The type of the resource <Name> The assigned name of the resource The <Namespace> is essentially the deployment target -- so "prod", "stage", etc -- although it is more general purpose to allow for future namespacing within a target (e.g., "prod/customer1", etc); for now this is rudimentary, however, see marapongo/mu#94. The <AllocModule> is the token for the code that contained the 'new' that led to this object being created. In the future, we may wish to extend this to also track the module under evaluation. (This is a nice aspect of monikers; they can become arbitrarily complex, so long as they are precise, and not prone to false positives/negatives.) The <Name> warrants more discussion. The resource provider is consulted via a new gRPC method, Name, that fetches the name. How the provider does this is entirely up to it. For some resource types, the resource may have properties that developers must set (e.g., `new Bucket("foo")`); for other providers, perhaps the resource intrinsically has a property that explicitly and uniquely qualifies the object (e.g., AWS SecurityGroups, via `new SecurityGroup({groupName: "my-sg"}`); and finally, it's conceivable that a provider might auto-generate the name (e.g., such as an AWS Lambda whose name could simply be a hash of the source code contents). This should overall produce better results with respect to moniker collisions, ability to match resources, and the usability of the system.
2017-02-24 22:50:02 +00:00
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.repeatedFields_, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse';
}
/**
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
* @private {!Array<number>}
* @const
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.repeatedFields_ = [2];
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
inputs: (f = msg.getInputs()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
failuresList: jspb.Message.toObjectList(msg.getFailuresList(),
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject, includeInstance)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse;
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setInputs(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure;
reader.readMessage(value,proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.addFailures(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getInputs();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
1,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
f = message.getFailuresList();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeRepeatedMessage(
2,
f,
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct inputs = 1;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.getInputs = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 1));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.setInputs = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 1, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.clearInputs = function() {
this.setInputs(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.hasInputs = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 1) != null;
};
/**
* repeated CheckFailure failures = 2;
* @return {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.getFailuresList = function() {
return /** @type{!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} */ (
jspb.Message.getRepeatedWrapperField(this, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, 2));
};
/** @param {!Array.<!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure>} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.setFailuresList = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, value);
};
/**
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure=} opt_value
* @param {number=} opt_index
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.addFailures = function(opt_value, opt_index) {
return jspb.Message.addToRepeatedWrapperField(this, 2, opt_value, proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, opt_index);
};
proto.pulumirpc.CheckResponse.prototype.clearFailuresList = function() {
this.setFailuresList([]);
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
property: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
reason: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, "")
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure;
return proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setProperty(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setReason(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getProperty();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getReason();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
2,
f
);
}
};
/**
* optional string property = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.getProperty = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.setProperty = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional string reason = 2;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.getReason = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CheckFailure.prototype.setReason = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
olds: (f = msg.getOlds()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
news: (f = msg.getNews()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setUrn(value);
break;
case 3:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setOlds(value);
break;
case 4:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setNews(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getUrn();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
2,
f
);
}
f = message.getOlds();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
3,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
f = message.getNews();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
4,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional string urn = 2;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct olds = 3;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getOlds = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setOlds = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.clearOlds = function() {
this.setOlds(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.hasOlds = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct news = 4;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.getNews = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 4));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.setNews = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 4, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.clearNews = function() {
this.setNews(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffRequest.prototype.hasNews = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 4) != null;
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.repeatedFields_, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse';
}
/**
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
* @private {!Array<number>}
* @const
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.repeatedFields_ = [1,2];
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
replacesList: jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(msg, 1),
stablesList: jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(msg, 2),
deletebeforereplace: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 3, false),
changes: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 4, 0)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse;
return proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.addReplaces(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.addStables(value);
break;
case 3:
var value = /** @type {boolean} */ (reader.readBool());
msg.setDeletebeforereplace(value);
break;
case 4:
var value = /** @type {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges} */ (reader.readEnum());
msg.setChanges(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getReplacesList();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeRepeatedString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getStablesList();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeRepeatedString(
2,
f
);
}
f = message.getDeletebeforereplace();
if (f) {
writer.writeBool(
3,
f
);
}
f = message.getChanges();
if (f !== 0.0) {
writer.writeEnum(
4,
f
);
}
};
/**
* @enum {number}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges = {
DIFF_UNKNOWN: 0,
DIFF_NONE: 1,
DIFF_SOME: 2
};
/**
* repeated string replaces = 1;
* @return {!Array.<string>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getReplacesList = function() {
return /** @type {!Array.<string>} */ (jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(this, 1));
};
/** @param {!Array.<string>} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setReplacesList = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setField(this, 1, value || []);
};
/**
* @param {!string} value
* @param {number=} opt_index
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.addReplaces = function(value, opt_index) {
jspb.Message.addToRepeatedField(this, 1, value, opt_index);
};
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.clearReplacesList = function() {
this.setReplacesList([]);
};
/**
* repeated string stables = 2;
* @return {!Array.<string>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getStablesList = function() {
return /** @type {!Array.<string>} */ (jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(this, 2));
};
/** @param {!Array.<string>} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setStablesList = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setField(this, 2, value || []);
};
/**
* @param {!string} value
* @param {number=} opt_index
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.addStables = function(value, opt_index) {
jspb.Message.addToRepeatedField(this, 2, value, opt_index);
};
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.clearStablesList = function() {
this.setStablesList([]);
};
/**
* optional bool deleteBeforeReplace = 3;
* Note that Boolean fields may be set to 0/1 when serialized from a Java server.
* You should avoid comparisons like {@code val === true/false} in those cases.
* @return {boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getDeletebeforereplace = function() {
return /** @type {boolean} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 3, false));
};
/** @param {boolean} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setDeletebeforereplace = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3BooleanField(this, 3, value);
};
/**
* optional DiffChanges changes = 4;
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.getChanges = function() {
return /** @type {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 4, 0));
};
/** @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.DiffChanges} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DiffResponse.prototype.setChanges = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3EnumField(this, 4, value);
};
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest = function(opt_data) {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest, jspb.Message);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest';
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
var f, obj = {
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest}
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest}
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setUrn(value);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
break;
case 2:
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest} message
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
var f = undefined;
f = message.getUrn();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
);
}
f = message.getProperties();
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
2,
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string urn = 1;
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.getProperties = function() {
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateRequest.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
Initial support for output properties (1 of 3) This change includes approximately 1/3rd of the change necessary to support output properties, as per pulumi/lumi#90. In short, the runtime now has a new hidden type, Latent<T>, which represents a "speculative" value, whose eventual type will be T, that we can use during evaluation in various ways. Namely, operations against Latent<T>s generally produce new Latent<U>s. During planning, any Latent<T>s that end up in resource properties are transformed into "unknown" property values. An unknown property value is legal only during planning-time activities, such as Check, Name, and InspectChange. As a result, those RPC interfaces have been updated to include lookaside maps indicating which properties have unknown values. My intent is to add some helper functions to make dealing with this circumstance more correct-by-construction. For now, using an unresolved Latent<T> in a conditional will lead to an error. See pulumi/lumi#67. Speculating beyond these -- by supporting iterative planning and application -- is something we want to support eventually, but it makes sense to do that as an additive change beyond this initial support. That is a missing 1/3. Finally, the other missing 1/3rd which will happen much sooner than the rest is restructuing plan application so that it will correctly observe resolution of Latent<T> values. Right now, the evaluation happens in one single pass, prior to the application, and so Latent<T>s never actually get witnessed in a resolved state.
2017-05-24 00:32:59 +00:00
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse;
return proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getProperties();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
2,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.getProperties = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.CreateResponse.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setUrn(value);
break;
case 3:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getUrn();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
2,
f
);
}
f = message.getProperties();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
3,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional string urn = 2;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 3;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.getProperties = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadRequest.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse;
return proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getProperties();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
2,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.getProperties = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ReadResponse.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
olds: (f = msg.getOlds()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
news: (f = msg.getNews()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setUrn(value);
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
break;
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
case 3:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setOlds(value);
break;
case 4:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setNews(value);
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getUrn();
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
2,
f
);
}
f = message.getOlds();
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
3,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
f = message.getNews();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
4,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
/**
* optional string urn = 2;
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
Implement resource provider plugins This change adds basic support for discovering, loading, binding to, and invoking RPC methods on, resource provider plugins. In a nutshell, we add a new context object that will share cached state such as loaded plugins and connections to them. It will be a policy decision in server scenarios how much state to share and between whom. This context also controls per-resource context allocation, which in the future will allow us to perform structured cancellation and teardown amongst entire groups of requests. Plugins are loaded based on their name, and can be found in one of two ways: either simply by having them on your path (with a name of "mu-ressrv-<pkg>", where "<pkg>" is the resource package name with any "/"s replaced with "_"s); or by placing them in the standard library installation location, which need not be on the path for this to work (since we know precisely where to look). If we find a protocol, we will load it as a child process. The protocol for plugins is that they will choose a port on their own -- to eliminate races that'd be involved should Mu attempt to pre-pick one for them -- and then write that out as the first line to STDOUT (terminated by a "\n"). This is the only STDERR/STDOUT that Mu cares about; from there, the plugin is free to write all it pleases (e.g., for logging, debugging purposes, etc). Afterwards, we then bind our gRPC connection to that port, and create a typed resource provider client. The CRUD operations that get driven by plan application are then simple wrappers atop the underlying gRPC calls. For now, we interpret all errors as catastrophic; in the near future, we will probably want to introduce a "structured error" mechanism in the gRPC interface for "transactional errors"; that is, errors for which the server was able to recover to a safe checkpoint, which can be interpreted as ResourceOK rather than ResourceUnknown.
2017-02-19 19:08:06 +00:00
};
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct olds = 3;
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getOlds = function() {
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setOlds = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.clearOlds = function() {
this.setOlds(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.hasOlds = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct news = 4;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.getNews = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 4));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.setNews = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 4, value);
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
};
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.clearNews = function() {
this.setNews(undefined);
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateRequest.prototype.hasNews = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 4) != null;
2017-07-19 14:57:22 +00:00
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse;
return proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getProperties();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
1,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 1;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.getProperties = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 1));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 1, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.UpdateResponse.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 1) != null;
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, null, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest';
}
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
urn: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 2, ""),
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest;
return proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setUrn(value);
break;
case 3:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
Implement components This change implements core support for "components" in the Pulumi Fabric. This work is described further in pulumi/pulumi#340, where we are still discussing some of the finer points. In a nutshell, resources no longer imply external providers. It's entirely possible to have a resource that logically represents something but without having a physical manifestation that needs to be tracked and managed by our typical CRUD operations. For example, the aws/serverless/Function helper is one such type. It aggregates Lambda-related resources and exposes a nice interface. All of the Pulumi Cloud Framework resources are also examples. To indicate that a resource does participate in the usual CRUD resource provider, it simply derives from ExternalResource instead of Resource. All resources now have the ability to adopt children. This is purely a metadata/tagging thing, and will help us roll up displays, provide attribution to the developer, and even hide aspects of the resource graph as appropriate (e.g., when they are implementation details). Our use of this capability is ultra limited right now; in fact, the only place we display children is in the CLI output. For instance: + aws:serverless:Function: (create) [urn=urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:serverless:Function::mylambda] => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/role:Role::mylambda-iamrole => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:iam/rolePolicyAttachment:RolePolicyAttachment::mylambda-iampolicy-0 => urn:pulumi:demo::serverless::aws:lambda/function:Function::mylambda The bit indicating whether a resource is external or not is tracked in the resulting checkpoint file, along with any of its children.
2017-10-14 21:18:43 +00:00
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getUrn();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
2,
f
);
}
f = message.getProperties();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
3,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional string urn = 2;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.getUrn = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 2, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.setUrn = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 2, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 3;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.getProperties = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 3));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 3, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.DeleteRequest.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 3) != null;
};
/**
* Generated by JsPbCodeGenerator.
* @param {Array=} opt_data Optional initial data array, typically from a
* server response, or constructed directly in Javascript. The array is used
* in place and becomes part of the constructed object. It is not cloned.
* If no data is provided, the constructed object will be empty, but still
* valid.
* @extends {jspb.Message}
* @constructor
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed = function(opt_data) {
jspb.Message.initialize(this, opt_data, 0, -1, proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.repeatedFields_, null);
};
goog.inherits(proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed, jspb.Message);
if (goog.DEBUG && !COMPILED) {
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.displayName = 'proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed';
}
/**
* List of repeated fields within this message type.
* @private {!Array<number>}
* @const
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.repeatedFields_ = [3];
if (jspb.Message.GENERATE_TO_OBJECT) {
/**
* Creates an object representation of this proto suitable for use in Soy templates.
* Field names that are reserved in JavaScript and will be renamed to pb_name.
* To access a reserved field use, foo.pb_<name>, eg, foo.pb_default.
* For the list of reserved names please see:
* com.google.apps.jspb.JsClassTemplate.JS_RESERVED_WORDS.
* @param {boolean=} opt_includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB instance
* for transitional soy proto support: http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @return {!Object}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.toObject = function(opt_includeInstance) {
return proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.toObject(opt_includeInstance, this);
};
/**
* Static version of the {@see toObject} method.
* @param {boolean|undefined} includeInstance Whether to include the JSPB
* instance for transitional soy proto support:
* http://goto/soy-param-migration
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed} msg The msg instance to transform.
* @return {!Object}
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.toObject = function(includeInstance, msg) {
var f, obj = {
id: jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(msg, 1, ""),
properties: (f = msg.getProperties()) && google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.toObject(includeInstance, f),
reasonsList: jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(msg, 3)
};
if (includeInstance) {
obj.$jspbMessageInstance = msg;
}
return obj;
};
}
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @param {jspb.ByteSource} bytes The bytes to deserialize.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.deserializeBinary = function(bytes) {
var reader = new jspb.BinaryReader(bytes);
var msg = new proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed;
return proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.deserializeBinaryFromReader(msg, reader);
};
/**
* Deserializes binary data (in protobuf wire format) from the
* given reader into the given message object.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed} msg The message object to deserialize into.
* @param {!jspb.BinaryReader} reader The BinaryReader to use.
* @return {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.deserializeBinaryFromReader = function(msg, reader) {
while (reader.nextField()) {
if (reader.isEndGroup()) {
break;
}
var field = reader.getFieldNumber();
switch (field) {
case 1:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.setId(value);
break;
case 2:
var value = new google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct;
reader.readMessage(value,google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.deserializeBinaryFromReader);
msg.setProperties(value);
break;
case 3:
var value = /** @type {string} */ (reader.readString());
msg.addReasons(value);
break;
default:
reader.skipField();
break;
}
}
return msg;
};
/**
* Serializes the message to binary data (in protobuf wire format).
* @return {!Uint8Array}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.serializeBinary = function() {
var writer = new jspb.BinaryWriter();
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.serializeBinaryToWriter(this, writer);
return writer.getResultBuffer();
};
/**
* Serializes the given message to binary data (in protobuf wire
* format), writing to the given BinaryWriter.
* @param {!proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed} message
* @param {!jspb.BinaryWriter} writer
* @suppress {unusedLocalVariables} f is only used for nested messages
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.serializeBinaryToWriter = function(message, writer) {
var f = undefined;
f = message.getId();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeString(
1,
f
);
}
f = message.getProperties();
if (f != null) {
writer.writeMessage(
2,
f,
google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct.serializeBinaryToWriter
);
}
f = message.getReasonsList();
if (f.length > 0) {
writer.writeRepeatedString(
3,
f
);
}
};
/**
* optional string id = 1;
* @return {string}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.getId = function() {
return /** @type {string} */ (jspb.Message.getFieldWithDefault(this, 1, ""));
};
/** @param {string} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.setId = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setProto3StringField(this, 1, value);
};
/**
* optional google.protobuf.Struct properties = 2;
* @return {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.getProperties = function() {
return /** @type{?proto.google.protobuf.Struct} */ (
jspb.Message.getWrapperField(this, google_protobuf_struct_pb.Struct, 2));
};
/** @param {?proto.google.protobuf.Struct|undefined} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.setProperties = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setWrapperField(this, 2, value);
};
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.clearProperties = function() {
this.setProperties(undefined);
};
/**
* Returns whether this field is set.
* @return {!boolean}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.hasProperties = function() {
return jspb.Message.getField(this, 2) != null;
};
/**
* repeated string reasons = 3;
* @return {!Array.<string>}
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.getReasonsList = function() {
return /** @type {!Array.<string>} */ (jspb.Message.getRepeatedField(this, 3));
};
/** @param {!Array.<string>} value */
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.setReasonsList = function(value) {
jspb.Message.setField(this, 3, value || []);
};
/**
* @param {!string} value
* @param {number=} opt_index
*/
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.addReasons = function(value, opt_index) {
jspb.Message.addToRepeatedField(this, 3, value, opt_index);
};
proto.pulumirpc.ErrorResourceInitFailed.prototype.clearReasonsList = function() {
this.setReasonsList([]);
};
goog.object.extend(exports, proto.pulumirpc);