[WIP] Typed capability API #462
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,164 @@ | ||
| package v2 | ||
|
|
||
| import ( | ||
| "context" | ||
| "encoding/json" | ||
|
|
||
| "github.com/invopop/jsonschema" | ||
| jsonvalidate "github.com/santhosh-tekuri/jsonschema/v5" | ||
|
|
||
| "github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-common/pkg/capabilities" | ||
| "github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-common/pkg/values" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| type CapabilityResponse[O any] struct { | ||
| Value O | ||
| Err error | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type CapabilityRequest[I, C any] struct { | ||
| Metadata capabilities.RequestMetadata | ||
| Config C | ||
| Inputs I | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type RegisterToWorkflowRequest[C any] struct { | ||
| Metadata capabilities.RegistrationMetadata | ||
| Config C | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type UnregisterFromWorkflowRequest[C any] struct { | ||
| Metadata capabilities.RegistrationMetadata | ||
| Config C | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type Capability[I, O, C any] interface { | ||
| RegisterToWorkflow(ctx context.Context, req RegisterToWorkflowRequest[C]) error | ||
| UnregisterFromWorkflow(ctx context.Context, req UnregisterFromWorkflowRequest[C]) error | ||
| Execute(ctx context.Context, callback chan<- CapabilityResponse[O], request CapabilityRequest[I, C]) error | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type capability[I, O, C any] struct { | ||
| inner Capability[I, O, C] | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *capability[I, O, C]) RegisterToWorkflow(ctx context.Context, req capabilities.RegisterToWorkflowRequest) error { | ||
| var conf C | ||
| err := c.validate(&conf, req.Config) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| err = req.Config.UnwrapTo(&conf) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| regReq := RegisterToWorkflowRequest[C]{ | ||
| Metadata: req.Metadata, | ||
| Config: conf, | ||
| } | ||
| return c.inner.RegisterToWorkflow(ctx, regReq) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *capability[I, O, C]) UnregisterFromWorkflow(ctx context.Context, req capabilities.UnregisterFromWorkflowRequest) error { | ||
| var conf C | ||
| err := c.validate(&conf, req.Config) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| err = req.Config.UnwrapTo(&conf) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| regReq := UnregisterFromWorkflowRequest[C]{ | ||
| Metadata: req.Metadata, | ||
| Config: conf, | ||
| } | ||
| return c.inner.UnregisterFromWorkflow(ctx, regReq) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *capability[I, O, C]) validate(str any, m *values.Map) error { | ||
| sch := jsonschema.Reflect(str) | ||
| schemab, err := json.Marshal(sch) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| mapping, err := values.Unwrap(m) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| schema, err := jsonvalidate.CompileString("<uriPrefix>", string(schemab)) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
| return schema.Validate(mapping) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *capability[I, O, C]) Execute(ctx context.Context, callback chan<- capabilities.CapabilityResponse, request capabilities.CapabilityRequest) error { | ||
| tcb := make(chan CapabilityResponse[O]) | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I mean obviously it stands for Typed Capability Response :P |
||
| go c.forwardResponses(ctx, callback, tcb) | ||
|
|
||
| var conf C | ||
| err := c.validate(&conf, request.Config) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| err = request.Config.UnwrapTo(&conf) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| var inp I | ||
| err = c.validate(&inp, request.Inputs) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| err = request.Inputs.UnwrapTo(&inp) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| treq := CapabilityRequest[I, C]{ | ||
| Metadata: request.Metadata, | ||
| Config: conf, | ||
| Inputs: inp, | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return c.inner.Execute(ctx, tcb, treq) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (c *capability[I, O, C]) forwardResponses(ctx context.Context, callback chan<- capabilities.CapabilityResponse, typedCallback chan CapabilityResponse[O]) { | ||
| for { | ||
| select { | ||
| case <-ctx.Done(): | ||
| return | ||
| case resp, isOpen := <-typedCallback: | ||
| if !isOpen { | ||
| close(callback) | ||
| return | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| v, err := values.Wrap(resp.Value) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| callback <- capabilities.CapabilityResponse{ | ||
| Err: err, | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| callback <- capabilities.CapabilityResponse{ | ||
| Value: v, | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func NewCapability[I, O, C any](cap Capability[I, O, C]) capabilities.CallbackExecutable { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. This looks great, and is the direction I wanted to take the Validation API efforts to :) I'd imagine there's a lot of value to be had by allowing the user to inject middlewares that are called during request/response lifecycle There was a problem hiding this comment. Yes agreed :) We could use this for observability and logging for example :) |
||
| return &capability[I, O, C]{ | ||
| inner: cap, | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ | ||
| package v2 | ||
|
|
||
| import ( | ||
| "context" | ||
| "testing" | ||
|
|
||
| "github.com/stretchr/testify/assert" | ||
| "github.com/stretchr/testify/require" | ||
|
|
||
| "github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-common/pkg/capabilities" | ||
| "github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-common/pkg/values" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| type typedCapability struct { | ||
| Capability[AnInput, AnOutput, AConfig] | ||
| inp AnInput | ||
| conf AConfig | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type AnInput struct { | ||
| Foo string `json:"foo"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type AConfig struct { | ||
| Bar string `json:"bar"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| type AnOutput struct { | ||
| Baz string `json:"baz"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (t *typedCapability) Execute(ctx context.Context, callback chan<- CapabilityResponse[AnOutput], req CapabilityRequest[AnInput, AConfig]) error { | ||
| t.inp = req.Inputs | ||
| t.conf = req.Config | ||
| return nil | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func TestCapabilityV2_Execute(t *testing.T) { | ||
| c := &typedCapability{} | ||
| cap := NewCapability(c) | ||
|
|
||
| cb := make(chan capabilities.CapabilityResponse) | ||
|
|
||
| conf, err := values.NewMap(map[string]any{ | ||
| "bar": "config-string", | ||
| }) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| inp, err := values.NewMap(map[string]any{ | ||
| "foo": "input-string", | ||
| }) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| req := capabilities.CapabilityRequest{ | ||
| Metadata: capabilities.RequestMetadata{}, | ||
| Config: conf, | ||
| Inputs: inp, | ||
| } | ||
| err = cap.Execute(context.Background(), cb, req) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| assert.Equal(t, AnInput{Foo: "input-string"}, c.inp) | ||
| assert.Equal(t, AConfig{Bar: "config-string"}, c.conf) | ||
| } |
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
How do those work in a remote setting? Does the receiver always know what type to expect or is there some type info encoded too?
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'd imagine it's the same, capabilities should have a input/config/output schema they abide to.
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.
@bolekk This is purely a client-side feature (i.e. inside the capability), anything accessing the capability (either via the Remote API or via the workflow engine would continue to do so via the lower-level, values-based API.