Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 27, 2025. It is now read-only.

Current state of Metafix implementation #60

Merged
merged 59 commits into from
Nov 9, 2021
Merged

Current state of Metafix implementation #60

merged 59 commits into from
Nov 9, 2021

Conversation

fsteeg
Copy link
Member

@fsteeg fsteeg commented Oct 14, 2021

As discussed in our recent meeting, we want to merge the current state of the Metafix implementation into the main branch to make clear where the main development is happening.

Would it make sense to resolve #35 with this and open new issues for specific improvements / new features?

@blackwinter Feel free to merge yourself as I'll be on vacation starting tomorrow (back on the 25th).

fsteeg added 30 commits July 2, 2021 15:39
Starting from a record map, not the event-based morph classes

Following Catmandu Fix cheat sheet at
https://github.com/LibreCat/Catmandu/wiki/Fixes-Cheat-Sheet
MetafixFilter was removed in f328a13
And TODOs for internal record representation as JSON-equivalent
Flattened field names vs. actual entities, both for emitting and
internal representation (apply actual JsonPath to the record?)
WIP: 4 failing tests with TODO comments for missing entity support
WIP: 3 failing tests with TODO comments for missing entity support
WIP: 2 failing tests with TODO comments for missing entity support
Used in `if` statements with `(all|any|none)_(contain|equal|match)`
Access group by name instead of index (which may be off when used in combination with unnamed groups).
Accidentally deleted during refactoring in a786f73
@fsteeg
Copy link
Member Author

fsteeg commented Nov 5, 2021

Why were ServerLauncher and FixServlet removed in a786f73?

Hm, that must have happened accidentally during refactoring, I restored them in e4dec3a.

Why was MetafixFilter removed in f328a13? [...] commit without any mention of the removal

Right, that should have been a separate commit, but was intentionally. My idea was that we don't need a separate filter command with fix, since we can filter in the main fix (or in a separate fix, but with normal fix behavior), e.g. like this.

@fsteeg
Copy link
Member Author

fsteeg commented Nov 5, 2021

I would suggest to create a Record class that wraps the Map<String, Object> instead of "littering" Metafix and FixMethod with static methods.

Yes, good point. I opened #64 for that.

@blackwinter blackwinter mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2021
@blackwinter
Copy link
Member

My idea was that we don't need a separate filter command with fix, since we can filter in the main fix (or in a separate fix, but with normal fix behavior)

Agreed, reject() is a viable alternative.

@fsteeg
Copy link
Member Author

fsteeg commented Nov 5, 2021

@blackwinter Alright, I hope I have addressed or opened issues for all your points. Reassigning & re-requesting review.

@fsteeg fsteeg requested a review from blackwinter November 5, 2021 14:32
@fsteeg fsteeg assigned blackwinter and unassigned fsteeg Nov 5, 2021
@blackwinter
Copy link
Member

I hope I have addressed or opened issues for all your points.

Yes, I believe everything's been addressed. Thank you! 😄

Once the conversation regarding the binding scope in do list has been resolved (either by opening an issue or, preferably, by changing the implementation), this pull request can be merged. I'll hold off on the final approval until then.

Copy link
Member

@blackwinter blackwinter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, let's move on then :)

For consistency: org.metafacture:metamorph org.metafacture:metafix
@fsteeg fsteeg merged commit 2cac372 into master Nov 9, 2021
@fsteeg fsteeg deleted the 35-metafix branch November 9, 2021 09:38
fsteeg added a commit to metafacture/metafacture-playground that referenced this pull request Nov 11, 2021
blackwinter added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2021
Seems to be currently unused and doesn't do what it's supposed to do.

See #60 (comment).
blackwinter added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2021
Seems to be currently unused and doesn't do what it's supposed to do.

See #60 (comment).
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Provide (non-field-streaming) record mode
2 participants