Gorka Lerchundi Osa

In case you didn’t noticed, there is a cel-cpp implementation already under the google’d umbrella: https://github.com/google/cel-cpp. On Thu, 4 Apr 2019 at 21:10, Kuat wrote: > I'm working on open...

Ignore me, you’re one of those 🤦‍♂️ On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 at 07:13, Gorka Lertxundi wrote: > In case you didn’t noticed, there is a cel-cpp implementation already >...

As per [this comment](https://github.com/envoyproxy/protoc-gen-validate/issues/141#issuecomment-475450422) it seems like you more o less decided to use the go parser instead of cel, is it possible to elaborate on this and the reasoning...

@rodaine and what about the first question regarding to the reasoning behind deciding to use go/parser instead of CEL? I would like to start working on this and wanted to...

And like attachments are for emails, issues are for pull requests. You find out seconds after hitting send that you forgot to see if there was one already fixing this...

We're also interested in this, is there anything we can do to help and push this forward? We're facing the same issues with binary data.

Is this issue already solved? It seems like staticcheck is already available. Just double-checking...

LGTM, please rebase on top of master as it already includes the fix proposed in #41. Thanks for the contribution, once rebased I will review ASAP.

I prefer to keep the generated code as simple as possible adding retry logic would complicate things a lot and the maintenance time would be much more. Furthermore I think...

hei @devinrsmith, i completely missed this issue, can you explain a little bit more? Which fails parkeeper or kafka? etc..