OneOf fields aren't linted

[alexhayes]

While writing a custom rule FIELD_NAMES_CAMEL_CASE I discovered that oneof fields are not linted by the rule FIELD_NAMES_LOWER_SNAKE_CASE or FIELDS_HAVE_COMMENT.

For example, if you have;

syntax = "proto3";

message Foo {
  oneof MyField {
    string eggs = 1;
    string sausage = 2;
  }
}

This will pass linting even with the FIELD_NAMES_LOWER_SNAKE_CASE and/or FIELDS_HAVE_COMMENT enabled - when I'd expect it to complain about the MyField not being lower snake case and/or containing a comment.

Am I correct in thinking this is how it should behave or is that not the intended behaviour? It looks as if that's how it should behave.

[yoheimuta]

@alexhayes Thank you for reaching out.

I discovered that oneof fields are not linted by the rule

Oneof fields are string eggs = 1; and string sausage = 2;, not oneof MyField { }.

• See oneof = "oneof" oneofName "{" { option | oneofField | emptyStatement } "}"

Style Guide mentions oneof field, but not oneof (name).

• See Use underscore_separated_names for field names (including oneof field and extension names)

Regardless of that, your suggestion might be appropriate as Language Guide uses underscore_separated_names for oneof name. And it makes sense that protolint needs to provide a way to complain about the MyField not containing a comment at least. Meanwhile, I'm not sure oneof (not oneof fields) should be dealt with as fields. What do you think?

• See oneof test_oneof