simplify the regorus API

[eric-therond]

Hello
I am facing troubles integrating regorus into an existing project mainly because of references to modules/schedule in the interpreter.

Because of this and the modules/schedule lifetimes I need to refactor my project to call the regorus API (like in test cases) and then to have a reference to the interpreter that is passed through functions of my project that need it (instead of storing the interpreter instance into a struct).

What do you think about "to hide" the complexity of the API (create the Sources, Parse and Analyze them, ...) and to store everything (struct instances not references) into the interpreter? something like that:

let mut interpreter = interpreter::Interpreter::new();
interpreter.add_module("myfile.rego");
interpreter.add_input("foo.json");
interpreter.eval_modules(enable_tracing)?;

[anakrish]

Great idea. Do you want to take a stab at it?

[eric-therond]

I tried a bit and the first part (storing modules, schedule, source objects in the struct interpreter...) requires a lot of changes in the whole code base and it's beyond my skills for the moment.

[anakrish]

I've taken a pass at simplifying the API:

regorus/examples/regorus.rs

Line 14 in d69b413

let mut engine = regorus::Engine::new();

.

Note, there are opportunities for optimizations and refactor/simplification/cleanup. The API will change in future.

[anakrish]

#43 does away with lifetimes. This will also allow holding on to various objects.

Note: The API is not finalized yet.

[anakrish]

@eric-therond
Can you share your use-case? IIRC you explicitly call eval_rule.

[eric-therond]

@anakrish

1. At the beginning of the program, I parse and "compile" all the rego rules.
2. Then the program evaluates the rego rules (eval_rule) that are associated to group of target files (*.yaml => rego(rule1, rule2, rule3), *.json=> rego(rule4, rule5, rule6) ...).
3. In reality it's a bit more complex eval_rule can be trigerred depending on some "events".

I suppose I have to use eval_query? I tried in the past, I don't remember why I was not able to continue in this direction. I will try again and update this thread.

[anakrish]

Thank you. Do let me know how it turns out. I want to make the Engine API support your use case nicely as well.