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

extend parsing instructions to use json object instead of plain txt #929

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 26, 2023

Conversation

mfederowicz
Copy link
Contributor

@mfederowicz mfederowicz commented Nov 1, 2023

related with #424

now we can use instead of txt format:

x = atomic.AddUint64(&x, 1) // MATCH /direct assignment to atomic value/

json format:

x = atomic.AddUint64(&x, 1) // json:{"MATCH": "direct assignment to atomic value","Confidence": 1}

of course this is only draft because I dont know how it should looks like logic to use all Failure properties, so I asume that for example we want to check if Confidence property have value equal to that setted up in json object, and if value is not equal then throw/log error otherwise everything is ok

this draft dont remove old MATH txt format, but add json feature, so we can use old format for some time :)

@chavacava what do you think about?

@chavacava
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @mfederowicz, thank you for the PR (and sorry for the late response)
I'll will take a look and come back to you ASAP

@chavacava chavacava merged commit 9e80d93 into mgechev:master Nov 26, 2023
4 checks passed
@chavacava
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @mfederowicz, thanks for the feature. We will be able to test rules with more precision ;)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants