[FEATURE]: JID #1473
[FEATURE]: JID #1473
Conversation
amadolid
force-pushed
the
feature/jid
branch
11 times, most recently
from
ca8aaf4 to
38f4752
Compare
amadolid
force-pushed
the
feature/jid
branch
5 times, most recently
from
8707b96 to
cda5059
Compare
| @@ -67,15 +66,15 @@ walker allow_other_root_access { | |||
| if self.via_all { | |||
| Jac.unrestrict(here, self.level); | |||
| } else { | |||
| Jac.allow_root(here, UUID(self.root_id), self.level); | |||
| Jac.allow_root(here, JacLangJID(self.root_id), self.level); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i wonder if we can somehow not having separate handling for jid between jaclang and jac-cloud. It would be cool if the jac code is the same.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for example, we define a plugin method that converts string to the corresponding JID type
| TARCH = TypeVar("TARCH", bound="Architype") | ||
| TANCH = TypeVar("TANCH", bound="Anchor") | ||
|
|
||
| JID_REGEX = compile( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd add a docstring here with an example jid.
| class Anchor: | ||
| """Object Anchor.""" | ||
|
|
||
| architype: Architype | ||
| id: UUID = field(default_factory=uuid4) | ||
| root: Optional[UUID] = None | ||
| id: Any = field(default_factory=uuid4) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we be more specific on type here and avoid Any?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Currently, the ID could be anything as it's also technically a read only field
|
|
||
|
|
||
| @dataclass(eq=False, repr=False, kw_only=True) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't we keep repr=False? since we are defining a custom repr
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I remember correctly, it will be only generated if you haven't specified __repr__
| source: NodeAnchor | ||
| target: NodeAnchor | ||
| source: JID["NodeAnchor"] | ||
| target: JID["NodeAnchor"] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the reference now is only the ID instead of actual NodeAnchor
No description provided.