This was actually quite nasty as the first bug covered the second one…
The first bug is with HasChange. This function uses reflect.DeepEqual
to check if two instances are the same/have the same content. This
works fine for all types except for Set’s as they contain a function.
And reflect.DeepEqual will only say the functions are equal if they are
both nil (which they aren’t in a Set). So in effect it means that
currently HasChange will always say true for Set’s, even when they are
actually being equal.
As soon as you fix this problem, you will notice the second one (which
the added test is written for). Without saying you want the exact diff,
you will end up with a merged value which will (in most cases) be the
same.
Run all unit tests and a good part of the acc tests to verify this
works as expected and all look good.
Currently the `sync.Once` call is only used to init a Set in the add()
func. So when you add a value to a Set that is the result of one of the
Set operations (i.e. union, difference, intersect) the Set will be
reinitialised and the exiting values will be lost.
I don’t have a clue why this is showing up in my ACC tests just now, as
this code is in there for quite some time already. Somehow it seems to
have something to do with the refactoring of the helper/schema done
last week, as I cannot reproduce this with
47f02f80bc
/cc @svanharmelen - I think some logic changed after my refactor. I now
return Exists: true when Computed: true but the value might be blank to
note that the FieldReader FOUND a value, its just unknown. I think
before it didn't do that so the logic for GetOk has to be "does it exist
and is it _not_ computed"
Seems weird because I just realized there is no way to get the OLD value
of something if it is being computed now, but I looked and there are
tests that verify this and they're like... test #5 of Get. So, they're
not new meaning that must've been expected behavior? Hm. Let me know if
you find any other issues from acceptance tests
/cc @phinze - This is pretty straightforward, almost magically so. The
reason this works is because in `diffString` we use mapstructure[1] with
"weak decode mode" to just be responisble for turning anything into a
string.
[1]: https://github.com/mitchellh/mapstructure
Don't check if the root key is being computed for composite types.
Instead, continue recursing the composite type in order to check if
the sub-key, key.N, for each individual element is being computed.
Fixes a panic which occurs when validating a composite type where
the value is an unknown kind for the schema.
Seth Vargo