Skip to content

Conversation

@gagantrivedi
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi force-pushed the feat/engine-eval-ctx branch 7 times, most recently from e9ab450 to c6b5a56 Compare October 28, 2025 10:26
@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi changed the title wip: Add evaluation context feat: Add evaluation context Oct 30, 2025
@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi marked this pull request as ready for review October 30, 2025 09:21
@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi requested a review from a team as a code owner October 30, 2025 09:21
@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi requested review from khvn26 and removed request for a team October 30, 2025 09:21
Copy link
Member

@khvn26 khvn26 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good overall. Left a handful of comments.

- Implement ConditionValue enum to handle string or array values
  - Supports Single(String) and Multiple(Vec<String>) variants
  - Custom deserializer handles JSON arrays, JSON array strings, and comma-separated strings
  - Helper methods: as_string(), as_vec(), contains_string()

- Simplify IN operator implementation
  - Use ConditionValue's contains_string() for string matching
  - Remove redundant JSON array parsing logic
- Fix collapsible_if warning: collapse nested if statements
- Fix manual_strip warning: use strip_suffix instead of manual slicing
- Fix unwrap_or_default warning: use or_default() instead of or_insert_with(Vec::new)
- Compare flag reason field in addition to enabled and value
- Ensure evaluation reasons (DEFAULT, TARGETING_MATCH, SPLIT) are correct
@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi requested a review from khvn26 November 7, 2025 06:39
Copy link
Member

@khvn26 khvn26 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍

@khvn26 khvn26 requested a review from emyller November 7, 2025 16:41
@gagantrivedi gagantrivedi merged commit c655d52 into main Nov 10, 2025
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants