-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Make background validation performed by Services configurable #2060 #2150
Make background validation performed by Services configurable #2060 #2150
Conversation
4f8be06
to
288fb26
Compare
Thank you for this pull request, @brungardtdb! I'm currently on vacation (for the rest of the year). I might take a look at this next week, when I get a chance, or at the latest in January, when I'm back to regular work. |
…. Then passed the validation config into the validation service.
…d to the validation service, and added validate_with_config() method to object.rs
288fb26
to
c411a63
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you again for the pull request, @brungardtdb! And I'm very sorry that it took me so long to review it. There was a confluence of factors that caused this. Usually, things around here work much more quickly!
I've left a few comments. Most are just me nit-picking, and fine to leave as-is (as noted in the respective comment). The only thing I'd like to see changed before merging, is the DerefMut
implementation.
crates/fj-core/src/services/mod.rs
Outdated
@@ -42,6 +42,18 @@ impl Services { | |||
} | |||
} | |||
|
|||
/// Construct an instance of `Services` with a pre-defined configuration for the validation service | |||
pub fn with_validation_config(config: &ValidationConfig) -> Self { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems a bit misleading to take a &ValidationConfig
that is then copied inside. It would be better to directly take ValidationConfig
.
But this is not a blocker. Happy to merge as-is!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This has been addressed.
/// Optional validation config | ||
config: Option<ValidationConfig>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's probably simpler to instead have config: ValidationConfig
, and initialize that with its default value, if not provided.
But this would be a nice-to-have. Perfectly fine to merge this as-is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This has also been addressed.
impl<S: State> DerefMut for Service<S> { | ||
fn deref_mut(&mut self) -> &mut Self::Target { | ||
&mut self.state | ||
} | ||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this is used by the new Services
constructor, which in itself seems fine. But this provides direct access to service state to all code, which seems error-prone.
I think there are two better ways to do this:
- Define a command for updating the validation config (see the existing
ValidationCommand
), make the execution of that command emitValidationEvent::ConfigurationDefined
, and useService::execute
to update the validation. - In the new
Services
constructor, instead of usingService::<Validation>::default()
, initialize the validation service withService::new
, which can be provided with aValidation
that has the configuration set properly.
Solution 1 is more verbose, and probably more flexible than we need. So I'd prefer solution 2. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I agree with you, solution 1 seems like it might be overkill, so I will try my hand at solution 2 and see how that goes. 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@hannobraun , I believe I have managed to implement all of the changes that you had suggested. Please take a look and let me know if this is what you were going for! 😄
No worries! I think I submitted this PR over the holidays, so I wasn't expecting to hear back right away. 😄 |
Passed in ValidationConfig directly instead of cloning a reference. Removed optional ValidationConfig for ValidationService, use default or config passed in through alternate constructor. Deleted DerefMut implementation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome, @brungardtdb! Thank you!
@hannobraun, thank you! |
Added functionality to pass in a predefined validation configuration into Services so that it can be used in the Validation Service as outlined in #2060.