Range Rule Implementation #24
Open
+244
−2
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sic2
reviewed
Jan 29, 2025
| if (step != null && min instanceof Number && max instanceof Number && step instanceof Number) { | ||
| double minVal = ((Number) min).doubleValue(); | ||
| double maxVal = ((Number) max).doubleValue(); | ||
| double stepVal = ((Number) step).doubleValue(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The type should be on the class: RangeRule, so there should be no need for this.
|
|
||
| private Result evaluateIn(T fact) { | ||
| if (step == null) { | ||
| return evaluateBetween(fact); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you assumign that step=1 in this case? Have you considered failing if step is not specified in IN operation?
| if (fact instanceof Number && step instanceof Number) { | ||
| double value = ((Number) fact).doubleValue(); | ||
| double minVal = ((Number) min).doubleValue(); | ||
| double stepVal = ((Number) step).doubleValue(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure I understand the step. Could we remove this for this initial iteration please?
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private Result evaluateIsBefore(T fact) { | ||
| int compareMin = fact.compareTo(min); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should consider the exclusive param for min here.
added 2 commits
February 3, 2025 10:45
|
Hi @sic2 , Thanks for the review and the comments. I have addressed the same. Please do have a look. |
sic2
reviewed
Feb 10, 2025
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private Result evaluateIsBefore(T fact) { | ||
| int compareMin = fact.compareTo(min); |
| ", ignore=" + isIgnore() + | ||
| "}"; | ||
| } | ||
| } |
| DIVISIBLE_BY, | ||
| BETWEEN, | ||
| IS_BEFORE, | ||
| IS_AFTER | ||
|
|
||
| // Operators not supported yet | ||
| // BETWEEN, |
| * @param <T> type of the fact (must extend Comparable) | ||
| */ | ||
| @Experimental | ||
| public class RangeRule<T extends Comparable<T>> extends OperatorBasedRule { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No need for an update to the README as this is experimental for now, but do have unit tests please.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This change introduces RANGE_RULE based on discussion #10
Related Issue
#10
Motivation and Context
The RangeRule class will be specifically designed for validating whether a given fact falls within a specified numeric range with different inclusivity options. It's well-suited for scenarios where we have predefined expectations about the valid range of values for a particular fact.
How Has This Been Tested?
Custom Implementation for use case
Types of changes
Checklist: