Array indexing on key paths

[Anilm3]

This PR adds support for numeric key paths on rules, for the purpose of addressing elements within an array but, more specifically for addressing both starting from the front or the back. For example:

• Addressing from the front requires a natural (>= 0) numeric index: ["key", 0, "other", 2].
• While addressing from the back requires a negative numeric index: ["key", -1, "other", -2].

Therefore when addressing from the front, indices start at 0, while addressing from the back indices start at -1.

As a result of this new feature, key paths with negative indices will be provided as such in the rule match specification, i.e. the negative values will be maintained to ensure that the key path accurately represents what the user requested.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Here are some suggestions.

Reply with @codex fix comments to fix any unresolved comments.

About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you open a pull request for review, mark a draft as ready, or comment "@codex review". If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex fix this CI failure" or "@codex address that feedback".

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks clang-pgo

Benchmark execution time: 2025-10-28 17:08:29

Comparing candidate commit 941b2d9 in PR branch anilm3/support-numeric-key-path with baseline commit f6d1998 in branch master.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 1 metrics, 0 unstable metrics.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 81.21212% with 31 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 85.05%. Comparing base (9a789f8) to head (9e47df3).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/iterator.cpp	81.66%	0 Missing and 11 partials ⚠️
src/object.hpp	66.66%	0 Missing and 9 partials ⚠️
src/condition/exists.cpp	85.00%	0 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
src/condition/shi_detector.cpp	83.33%	0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
src/utils.hpp	66.66%	0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
src/configuration/common/expression_parser.cpp	66.66%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/configuration/common/raw_configuration.cpp	93.33%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/configuration/processor_parser.cpp	66.66%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
src/obfuscator.cpp	50.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #458      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   85.21%   85.05%   -0.17%     
==========================================
  Files         189      189              
  Lines        9226     9279      +53     
  Branches     4179     4225      +46     
==========================================
+ Hits         7862     7892      +30     
- Misses        528      529       +1     
- Partials      836      858      +22     

Flag	Coverage Δ
waf_test	85.05% <81.21%> (-0.17%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

[github-actions]

Artifact Size Comparison 📦

Artifact	Previous Release	This PR	Difference
darwin-arm64::libddwaf.a	90006808	96224016	0.06%
darwin-arm64::libddwaf.a.stripped	4579664	4973160	0.08%
darwin-arm64::libddwaf.dylib	1963024	2059120	0.04%
darwin-universal::libddwaf.a	181421048	193946552	0.06%
darwin-universal::libddwaf.a.stripped	9765560	10603800	0.08%
darwin-universal::libddwaf.dylib	4142096	4336496	0.04%
darwin-x86_64::libddwaf.a	91414192	97722488	0.06%
darwin-x86_64::libddwaf.a.stripped	5185848	5630592	0.08%
darwin-x86_64::libddwaf.dylib	2150896	2248136	0.04%
linux-aarch64::libddwaf.a	73159398	78323148	0.07%
linux-aarch64::libddwaf.a.stripped	11852314	12513000	0.05%
linux-aarch64::libddwaf.so	2463264	2520768	0.02%
linux-armv7::libddwaf.a	64719602	69316132	0.07%
linux-armv7::libddwaf.a.stripped	10852830	11479548	0.05%
linux-armv7::libddwaf.so	2148796	2185128	0.01%
linux-i386::libddwaf.a	62843294	67377466	0.07%
linux-i386::libddwaf.a.stripped	9380114	9929602	0.05%
linux-i386::libddwaf.so	2392820	2448700	0.02%
linux-x86_64::libddwaf.a	73646022	78812370	0.07%
linux-x86_64::libddwaf.a.stripped	11671354	12311390	0.05%
linux-x86_64::libddwaf.so	2660096	2723328	0.02%
windows-arm64::ddwaf.dll	4788736	4944896	0.03%
windows-arm64::ddwaf.lib	11698	16410	0.40%
windows-arm64::ddwaf_static.lib	57913956	61081072	0.05%
windows-win32::ddwaf.dll	3368448	3484672	0.03%
windows-win32::ddwaf.lib	11922	16726	0.40%
windows-win32::ddwaf_static.lib	49534552	52553630	0.06%
windows-x64::ddwaf.dll	4101632	4212224	0.02%
windows-x64::ddwaf.lib	11698	16410	0.40%
windows-x64::ddwaf_static.lib	57410292	60800734	0.05%

[Anilm3]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Something went wrong. Try again later by commenting “@codex review”.

An unknown error occurred

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting

• @codex fix this CI failure
• @codex address that feedback

[Anilm3]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1]

🎯 Code Coverage
• Patch Coverage: 99.40%
• Total Coverage: 94.00% (+0.02%)

View detailed report

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 9e47df3 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Was this helpful? Give us feedback!}