feat: expose get_satisfied_experiments and refactor code for resolution #755
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Review changes with Changed Files
|
| ) -> Result<serde_json::Map<String, Value>> { | ||
| self.eval_config(evaluation_context).await | ||
| prefix_filters: Option<Vec<String>>, | ||
| ) -> Result<(serde_json::Map<String, Value>, Vec<String>)> { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we make a type for this?
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Aliasing it for now
Datron
force-pushed
the
expose-satisfied-experiments
branch
3 times, most recently
from
5fdfbca to
00fb43c
Compare
mahatoankitkumar
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2025
Collaborator
mahatoankitkumar
left a comment
mahatoankitkumar
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
TODO for the next PR.
- Making a separate type instead of aliasing.
- And expose these functions in other providers too.
knutties
reviewed
Nov 28, 2025
| .await | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pub async fn get_running_experiments_from_provider(&self) -> Result<Experiments> { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why call this get_running_experiments_from_provider while using the get_cached_experiments inside? 1-1 naming will be helpful here ?
- Add variants chosen to the Resolution Details so users can validate and debug
Datron
force-pushed
the
expose-satisfied-experiments
branch
2 times, most recently
from
34c16c4 to
bf955aa
Compare
Datron
force-pushed
the
expose-satisfied-experiments
branch
from
bf955aa to
128469a
Compare
ayushjain17
reviewed
Dec 16, 2025
| &self, | ||
| query_data: &serde_json::Map<String, Value>, | ||
| prefix_filter: Option<&[String]>, | ||
| prefix_filter: Option<Vec<String>>, |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not reference, if we dont need reference here then in line 233 of this file, we dont need the to_vec conversion anymore
ayushjain17
requested changes
Dec 18, 2025
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| let cac_config = CacConfig::new(superposition_options, config_options); | ||
| let cac_config = CacClient::new(superposition_options, config_options); |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| let cac_config = CacClient::new(superposition_options, config_options); | |
| let cac_client = CacClient::new(superposition_options, config_options); |
| )); | ||
|
|
||
| let exp_config = ExperimentationConfig::new(superposition_options, exp_options); | ||
| let exp_config = ExperimentationClient::new(superposition_options, exp_options); |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| let exp_config = ExperimentationClient::new(superposition_options, exp_options); | |
| let exp_client = ExperimentationClient::new(superposition_options, exp_options); |
| ) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| pub async fn get_last_modified_time(&self) -> Result<DateTime<Utc>> { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this function name says last modified, but it is returning last updated
they seem totally different and confusing though
| flag_key: &str, | ||
| evaluation_context: &EvaluationContext, | ||
| converter: fn(&Value) -> EvaluationResult<T>, | ||
| ) -> EvaluationResult<ResolutionDetails<T>> { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
astonishing! open-feature already had such types
ayushjain17
reviewed
Dec 22, 2025
Comment on lines
+235
to
+247
| if targeting_key.is_some() { | ||
| if let Some(exp_config) = &self.exp_client { | ||
| let applicable_variant_ids = exp_config | ||
| .get_applicable_variants(&dimensions_info, &context, targeting_key) | ||
| .await?; | ||
|
|
||
| context.insert( | ||
| "variantIds".to_string(), | ||
| Value::Array(variant_ids.into_iter().map(Value::String).collect()), | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| match &self.cac_config { | ||
| Some(cac_config) => cac_config.evaluate_config(&context, None).await, | ||
| None => Err(SuperpositionError::ConfigError( | ||
| "CAC config not initialized".into(), | ||
| )), | ||
| context.insert("variantIds".to_string(), json!(applicable_variant_ids)); | ||
| variant_ids = applicable_variant_ids; | ||
| } else { | ||
| log::warn!("Targeting key is set, but experiments have not been defined in the superposition provider builder options") | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| let Some(ref client) = self.cac_client else { |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this section feels wrong, ideally shouldn't this have been separate and not part of eval_config, rather passed in to this
or maybe having this in here is still fine but not returned from every resolve operation
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
Internal juspay systems require more information from the provider to provide adequate debugging information
Solution
Future TODO
Have all s11n providers expose the same interface. This will be done in a future PR