Skip to content
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

feat(extractor): improvements #67

Open
1 of 8 tasks
lonerapier opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #95
Open
1 of 8 tasks

feat(extractor): improvements #67

lonerapier opened this issue Aug 29, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #95
Assignees
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed question Further information is requested research Asking to dive into an unknown

Comments

@lonerapier
Copy link
Collaborator

lonerapier commented Aug 29, 2024

Following improvements are possible in extractor:

  • parser should handle data length more than actual length (forgot what this means lmao)
  • build parser state and then run extractor
  • remove ValueLen, don't think it's needed
  • remove depth
  • decide whether want generalisation or performance (low constraints)
  • currently extractor circuit can’t extract array-only JSON, i.e. if keys are 0.0
  • extract complete array
  • how-to readme and explanation docs #68
@Autoparallel
Copy link
Contributor

Would love to see these turned into issues :)

Can be more specific on if HTTP or JSON too

@Autoparallel Autoparallel added help wanted Extra attention is needed question Further information is requested research Asking to dive into an unknown labels Sep 9, 2024
@lonerapier lonerapier linked a pull request Oct 11, 2024 that will close this issue
@lonerapier lonerapier linked a pull request Oct 11, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed question Further information is requested research Asking to dive into an unknown
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants