TRPL

03/20/2025

02:02 PM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

> I committed the initial implementation of TRPL feature tracking system
These are interesting results. Some feed... Greg Shah

01:49 PM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

> Updated the [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Expressions#Features|Expression Features]] documentation. I added an introduction to... Greg Shah

11:00 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

I committed the initial implementation of TRPL feature tracking system into task branch *1745a/15792*. I added a clas... Octavian Adrian Gavril

07:46 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Please, let me know if improvements are needed. Octavian Adrian Gavril

07:44 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Updated the [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Expressions#Features|Expression Features]] documentation. I added an introduction to t... Octavian Adrian Gavril

03/19/2025

01:21 PM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Greg Shah wrote:
> > Still looking for the *Automatic Null Checking* implementation to expand its documentation.
> ... Eric Faulhaber

01:04 PM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Octavian Adrian Gavril wrote:
> Eric, is *Automatic Null Checking* related to code sections similar to this?
>
> ... Eric Faulhaber

10:26 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Yes, that works. Greg Shah

10:16 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Is it OK if I start with the items mentioned in the table in [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Rule-Sets#Pipeline-and-Ruleset-Profil... Octavian Adrian Gavril

08:27 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Question from Octavian:
> Should I configure ConfigLoader and Compiler to track each .rules file/.xml file/rule-se... Greg Shah

03/14/2025

05:44 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Ovidiu, I will be honest, I don't know. I just created a patch that prints the keys in a file, and that's it, I didn'... Radu Apetrii

03/13/2025

01:11 PM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Radu,
I had peeked at the list you compiled. I am puzzled by something: why are there customer-specific values saved... Ovidiu Maxiniuc

07:20 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Remove the customer-specific stuff (you can leave behind description of what was removed) and post it in #9721. Greg Shah

07:16 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Greg Shah wrote:
> We need to post that somewhere else, it has customer table names in it. Also, this is better don... Radu Apetrii

06:41 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

We need to post that somewhere else, it has customer table names in it. Also, this is better done in a FWD sub-proje... Greg Shah

05:04 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Here's a list of all annotations that were identified in at least one customer application. They are already sorted i... Radu Apetrii

03/12/2025

01:14 PM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

> If the point is for TRPL to be independent of what the annotations are, can a provider for the annotations be plug... Greg Shah

11:03 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

If the point is for TRPL to be independent of what the annotations are, can a provider for the annotations be plugge... Constantin Asofiei

10:54 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

It is an interesting idea.
Pros:
* There would be a simple way to check if an annotation name was valid.
* Pe... Greg Shah

10:41 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

The main reason is the performance of the @AnnotateAst.annotations@ map - this was optimized in the past, especially ... Constantin Asofiei

10:33 AM Feature #9770: Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Because I'm currently working on gathering all annotation types (or as many as I can find), this idea was brought up.... Radu Apetrii

10:28 AM Feature #9770 (New): Change annotation key type from plain string to Enum

Radu Apetrii

03/10/2025

09:03 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Eric, is *Automatic Null Checking* related to code sections similar to this?... Octavian Adrian Gavril

03/05/2025

08:01 PM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

> Still looking for the *Automatic Null Checking* implementation to expand its documentation.
Eric: Can you please... Greg Shah

07:57 PM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

> I've updated the description of the first two features from [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Expressions#Features|Expression Feat... Greg Shah

03/04/2025

06:50 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

I added some documentation for *Property Notation* feature. Still looking for the *Automatic Null Checking* implement... Octavian Adrian Gavril

03/03/2025

09:24 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Greg Shah wrote:
> I'm worried that these [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Expressions#Features|Expression Features]] are not docu... Octavian Adrian Gavril

02/28/2025

09:53 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Octavian Adrian Gavril wrote:
> I've reviewed [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Expressions]] along with the associated code and it... Greg Shah

09:49 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Look for any location that instantiates @new PatternEngine()@. For example, in @TransformDriver.processTrees()@. Greg Shah

09:44 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Greg, where is @PatternEngine.main@ called in order to run the entire TRPL rule-set? I saw some targets in @build_db.... Octavian Adrian Gavril

08:46 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

I've reviewed [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Expressions]] along with the associated code and it seems fully documented to me. I'... Octavian Adrian Gavril

05:10 AM Feature #1745 (WIP): review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Octavian Adrian Gavril

02/27/2025

09:09 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

I reviewed @ConfigLoader.java@ along with [[p2j:Writing_TRPL_Rule-Sets]] and these are some features that I found und... Octavian Adrian Gavril

02/25/2025

04:48 PM Feature #1747: evaluate Scala for suitability as the basis for TRPL as a DSL

At one point (15? years ago now) I tested the performance of Groovy vs Java and found that Groovy was several orders ... Greg Shah

08:56 AM Feature #1747: evaluate Scala for suitability as the basis for TRPL as a DSL

This crossed my way a couple a weeks ago and now I am feeling guilty that I did not make a post in time. But maybe it... Alexandru Lungu

11:40 AM Feature #1745: review, decide upon and document the 1.0 features which will be retained in 2.0

Our existing documentation is here:
* [[p2j:Writing TRPL Rule-Sets]] - This defines the language at the level of s... Greg Shah