# frozen_string_literal: true

# Copyright 2022 Google LLC
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
#     https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

# Auto-generated by gapic-generator-ruby. DO NOT EDIT!


module Google
  module Protobuf
    # `FieldMask` represents a set of symbolic field paths, for example:
    #
    #     paths: "f.a"
    #     paths: "f.b.d"
    #
    # Here `f` represents a field in some root message, `a` and `b`
    # fields in the message found in `f`, and `d` a field found in the
    # message in `f.b`.
    #
    # Field masks are used to specify a subset of fields that should be
    # returned by a get operation or modified by an update operation.
    # Field masks also have a custom JSON encoding (see below).
    #
    # # Field Masks in Projections
    #
    # When used in the context of a projection, a response message or
    # sub-message is filtered by the API to only contain those fields as
    # specified in the mask. For example, if the mask in the previous
    # example is applied to a response message as follows:
    #
    #     f {
    #       a : 22
    #       b {
    #         d : 1
    #         x : 2
    #       }
    #       y : 13
    #     }
    #     z: 8
    #
    # The result will not contain specific values for fields x,y and z
    # (their value will be set to the default, and omitted in proto text
    # output):
    #
    #
    #     f {
    #       a : 22
    #       b {
    #         d : 1
    #       }
    #     }
    #
    # A repeated field is not allowed except at the last position of a
    # paths string.
    #
    # If a FieldMask object is not present in a get operation, the
    # operation applies to all fields (as if a FieldMask of all fields
    # had been specified).
    #
    # Note that a field mask does not necessarily apply to the
    # top-level response message. In case of a REST get operation, the
    # field mask applies directly to the response, but in case of a REST
    # list operation, the mask instead applies to each individual message
    # in the returned resource list. In case of a REST custom method,
    # other definitions may be used. Where the mask applies will be
    # clearly documented together with its declaration in the API.  In
    # any case, the effect on the returned resource/resources is required
    # behavior for APIs.
    #
    # # Field Masks in Update Operations
    #
    # A field mask in update operations specifies which fields of the
    # targeted resource are going to be updated. The API is required
    # to only change the values of the fields as specified in the mask
    # and leave the others untouched. If a resource is passed in to
    # describe the updated values, the API ignores the values of all
    # fields not covered by the mask.
    #
    # If a repeated field is specified for an update operation, new values will
    # be appended to the existing repeated field in the target resource. Note that
    # a repeated field is only allowed in the last position of a `paths` string.
    #
    # If a sub-message is specified in the last position of the field mask for an
    # update operation, then new value will be merged into the existing sub-message
    # in the target resource.
    #
    # For example, given the target message:
    #
    #     f {
    #       b {
    #         d: 1
    #         x: 2
    #       }
    #       c: [1]
    #     }
    #
    # And an update message:
    #
    #     f {
    #       b {
    #         d: 10
    #       }
    #       c: [2]
    #     }
    #
    # then if the field mask is:
    #
    #  paths: ["f.b", "f.c"]
    #
    # then the result will be:
    #
    #     f {
    #       b {
    #         d: 10
    #         x: 2
    #       }
    #       c: [1, 2]
    #     }
    #
    # An implementation may provide options to override this default behavior for
    # repeated and message fields.
    #
    # In order to reset a field's value to the default, the field must
    # be in the mask and set to the default value in the provided resource.
    # Hence, in order to reset all fields of a resource, provide a default
    # instance of the resource and set all fields in the mask, or do
    # not provide a mask as described below.
    #
    # If a field mask is not present on update, the operation applies to
    # all fields (as if a field mask of all fields has been specified).
    # Note that in the presence of schema evolution, this may mean that
    # fields the client does not know and has therefore not filled into
    # the request will be reset to their default. If this is unwanted
    # behavior, a specific service may require a client to always specify
    # a field mask, producing an error if not.
    #
    # As with get operations, the location of the resource which
    # describes the updated values in the request message depends on the
    # operation kind. In any case, the effect of the field mask is
    # required to be honored by the API.
    #
    # ## Considerations for HTTP REST
    #
    # The HTTP kind of an update operation which uses a field mask must
    # be set to PATCH instead of PUT in order to satisfy HTTP semantics
    # (PUT must only be used for full updates).
    #
    # # JSON Encoding of Field Masks
    #
    # In JSON, a field mask is encoded as a single string where paths are
    # separated by a comma. Fields name in each path are converted
    # to/from lower-camel naming conventions.
    #
    # As an example, consider the following message declarations:
    #
    #     message Profile {
    #       User user = 1;
    #       Photo photo = 2;
    #     }
    #     message User {
    #       string display_name = 1;
    #       string address = 2;
    #     }
    #
    # In proto a field mask for `Profile` may look as such:
    #
    #     mask {
    #       paths: "user.display_name"
    #       paths: "photo"
    #     }
    #
    # In JSON, the same mask is represented as below:
    #
    #     {
    #       mask: "user.displayName,photo"
    #     }
    #
    # # Field Masks and Oneof Fields
    #
    # Field masks treat fields in oneofs just as regular fields. Consider the
    # following message:
    #
    #     message SampleMessage {
    #       oneof test_oneof {
    #         string name = 4;
    #         SubMessage sub_message = 9;
    #       }
    #     }
    #
    # The field mask can be:
    #
    #     mask {
    #       paths: "name"
    #     }
    #
    # Or:
    #
    #     mask {
    #       paths: "sub_message"
    #     }
    #
    # Note that oneof type names ("test_oneof" in this case) cannot be used in
    # paths.
    #
    # ## Field Mask Verification
    #
    # The implementation of any API method which has a FieldMask type field in the
    # request should verify the included field paths, and return an
    # `INVALID_ARGUMENT` error if any path is unmappable.
    # @!attribute [rw] paths
    #   @return [::Array<::String>]
    #     The set of field mask paths.
    class FieldMask
      include ::Google::Protobuf::MessageExts
      extend ::Google::Protobuf::MessageExts::ClassMethods
    end
  end
end