File

util.jsonschema: Fix validation to not assume presence of "type" field MattJ reported a curious issue where validation did not work as expected. Primarily that the "type" field was expected to be mandatory, and thus leaving it out would result in no checks being performed. This was likely caused by misreading during initial development. Spent some time testing against https://github.com/json-schema-org/JSON-Schema-Test-Suite.git and discovered a multitude of issues, far too many to bother splitting into separate commits. More than half of them fail. Many because of features not implemented, which have been marked NYI. For example, some require deep comparisons e.g. when objects or arrays are present in enums fields. Some because of quirks with how Lua differs from JavaScript, e.g. no distinct array or object types. Tests involving fractional floating point numbers. We're definitely not going to follow references to remote resources. Or deal with UTF-16 sillyness. One test asserted that 1.0 is an integer, where Lua 5.3+ will disagree.

-- Prosody IM
-- Copyright (C) 2008-2010 Matthew Wild
-- Copyright (C) 2008-2010 Waqas Hussain
--
-- This project is MIT/X11 licensed. Please see the
-- COPYING file in the source package for more information.
--



local unpack = table.unpack or unpack; --luacheck: ignore 113
local t_insert = table.insert;
function _G.import(module, ...)
	local m = package.loaded[module] or require(module);
	if type(m) == "table" and ... then
		local ret = {};
		for _, f in ipairs{...} do
			t_insert(ret, m[f]);
		end
		return unpack(ret);
	end
	return m;
end