fix: Reverting dot notation operations in beforeSave causes an error after the write

[mtrezza]

Issue

Reverting dot notation operations in beforeSave causes an error after the write.

Tasks

• Add tests

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes
  • Reverting changes to nested fields during a save now restores their original values, including for delete and other field operations, while allowing unrelated updates to proceed.
  • Save responses now omit protected fields and their nested values when the requester lacks permission, while retaining permitted public fields. Authorized responses continue to include protected values.
  • Reverted field values are reflected consistently in saved objects and subsequent save-related updates.

[parse-github-assistant]

🚀 Thanks for opening this pull request! We appreciate your effort in improving the project. Please let us know once your pull request is ready for review.

Tip

• Keep pull requests small. Large PRs will be rejected. Break complex features into smaller, incremental PRs.
• Use Test Driven Development. Write failing tests before implementing functionality. Ensure tests pass.
• Group code into logical blocks. Add a short comment before each block to explain its purpose.
• We offer conceptual guidance. Coding is up to you. PRs must be merge-ready for human review.
• Our review focuses on concept, not quality. PRs with code issues will be rejected. Use an AI agent.
• Human review time is precious. Avoid review ping-pong. Inspect and test your AI-generated code.

Note

Please respond to review comments from AI agents just like you would to comments from a human reviewer. Let the reviewer resolve their own comments, unless they have reviewed and accepted your commit, or agreed with your explanation for why the feedback was incorrect.

Caution

Pull requests must be written using an AI agent with human supervision. Pull requests written entirely by a human will likely be rejected, because of lower code quality, higher review effort and the higher risk of introducing bugs. Please note that AI review comments on this pull request alone do not satisfy this requirement. Our CI and AI review are safeguards, not development tools. If many issues are flagged, rethink your development approach. Invest more effort in planning and design rather than using review cycles to fix low-quality code.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

• Configuration used: Organization UI
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Essentials
• Run ID: 3640cf8c-bce6-4352-be0f-0b17d684a159

---

---

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 4119ea8 and 21b4c25.

---

---

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• spec/CloudCode.spec.js

---

---

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 10 included reviews per hour; 9 remain after this review.

---

---

---

📝 Walkthrough

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

RestWrite now handles reverted dotted fields using original data and filters protected fields and their descendants from responses. Tests cover REST updates, save triggers, fetched objects, LiveQuery updates, and response behavior across authentication modes.

Changes

Nested field reversion

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Response reconciliation src/RestWrite.js	Protected-field filtering now removes response keys nested beneath protected fields. Reverted operations are applied to a copy of the write data. For dotted paths, the code restores the original value when present or applies Delete when absent.
Reversion behavior validation spec/CloudCode.spec.js, spec/ProtectedFields.spec.js	Tests cover reverted operations in REST saves, SDK and fetched objects, afterSave, LiveQuery updates, and responses under four authentication modes.

Priority: ➖ Normal

Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes

---

---

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 21b4c

The change reconciles reverted nested fields and filters protected response descendants; the reviewed paths and regression cases show no concrete merge-blocking risk.

---

Caution

Pre-merge checks failed

Please resolve all errors before merging. Addressing warnings is optional.

• Ignore

❌ Failed checks (1 error)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check		The description identifies the issue and confirms that tests were added, but it omits the required Approach section and does not remove the inapplicable unchecked tasks.	Add an Approach section that explains the RestWrite.js fix and regression tests. Remove unchecked tasks that do not apply, or mark applicable completed tasks accordingly.

✅ Passed checks (6 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check		The title begins with the required fix: prefix, uses a capitalized first word, and clearly describes the dot-notation revert error addressed by the changes.
Docstring Coverage		No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 3…
Linked Issues check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Security Check		No security vulnerability is introduced by the reviewed changes. The production diff only (1) removes response keys that equal a protected field or are its dotted descendants, which strengthens protec…
Engage In Review Feedback		No review feedback comments were provided. The current review produced zero actionable findings, and no CodeRabbit review threads were returned. Therefore, there was no feedback that the contributor c…

---

---

• Fix all pre-merge checks with AI

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create a new PR

---

---

---

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.00%. Comparing base (36af858) to head (21b4c25).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on alpha.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            alpha   #10785      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.00%   94.00%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         193      193              
  Lines       17125    17128       +3     
  Branches      259      259              
==========================================
+ Hits        16099    16101       +2     
- Misses       1004     1005       +1     
  Partials       22       22              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[coderabbitai]

Pre-merge checks failed. Please resolve the failing checks before merging.