fix: removed use_async flag in cerebras client #1179
Conversation
![ellipsis-dev[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/64358?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❌ Changes requested. Reviewed everything up to 1b747af in 20 seconds
More details
- Looked at
37lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. instructor/client_cerebras.py:45
- Draft comment:
The removal of theuse_asyncflag is appropriate since the type ofclientalready determines whether the function should return anInstructororAsyncInstructor. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%
The removal of theuse_asyncflag is appropriate since the type ofclientalready determines whether the function should return anInstructororAsyncInstructor.
Workflow ID: wflow_fuoUKe8og5wpnThm
Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
github-actions
bot
added
bug
Deploying instructor-py with
|
| Latest commit: |
5302263
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://7e42fb24.instructor-py.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://migrate-cerebras-mode.instructor-py.pages.dev |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 5cc7ed1 in 16 seconds
More details
- Looked at
12lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. instructor/client_cerebras.py:3
- Draft comment:
The removal ofLiteralfrom the imports is correct since it is not used in the code. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:0%
The import ofLiteralwas removed but not used in the code, so this change is correct.
Workflow ID: wflow_XSa4MnshchwTPeiR
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 1c988fb in 13 seconds
More details
- Looked at
22lines of code in1files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
2drafted comments based on config settings.
1. pyproject.toml:41
- Draft comment:
Ensure that the updatedcerebras_cloud_sdkversion^1.11.0is compatible with the rest of the codebase and does not introduce any breaking changes. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:50%
The PR updates the version ofcerebras_cloud_sdkfrom^1.5.0to^1.11.0. This change is consistent across both the main dependencies and the extras section, which is good for consistency. However, it's important to ensure that the new version is compatible with the rest of the codebase and does not introduce any breaking changes.
2. pyproject.toml:41
- Draft comment:
Ensure that documentation and tests are updated to reflect the version change ofcerebras_cloud_sdkfrom^1.5.0to^1.11.0. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:80%
The version update of thecerebras_cloud_sdklibrary inpyproject.tomlshould be accompanied by updates in documentation and tests, as per the rules.
Workflow ID: wflow_C90zfYWgW9IaUk1O
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 0465c3e in 16 seconds
More details
- Looked at
20lines of code in1files - Skipped
1files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
1drafted comments based on config settings.
1. pyproject.toml:20
- Draft comment:
If thecerebras_cloud_sdklibrary update involves any changes in functionality or usage, ensure that the documentation is updated accordingly. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:50%
The update tocerebras_cloud_sdkversion inpyproject.tomlshould be accompanied by documentation updates if necessary.
Workflow ID: wflow_qcIdVR5XpLtFzu0x
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Skipped PR review on bcc491e because no changed files had a supported extension. If you think this was in error, please contact us and we'll fix it right away.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on aca27b4 in 27 seconds
More details
- Looked at
138lines of code in3files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
4drafted comments based on config settings.
1. base.py:5
- Draft comment:
The environment variableGOOGLE_API_KEYshould beOPENAI_API_KEYto match the expected variable for OpenAI API keys. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable:
The comment points out a potential mismatch between the environment variable name and the library being used. This could be a valid issue if the API key is indeed for OpenAI and not Google. However, without more context on the environment setup or the intended use of the API key, it's speculative. The comment does not provide strong evidence that a change is required.
I might be missing the context of the environment setup or the specific use case for the API key. The code could be intentionally using a Google API key for a specific reason not evident in the diff.
Given the use of the OpenAI library, it is reasonable to expect the environment variable to match the library's naming conventions unless there is a specific reason otherwise.
The comment highlights a potential issue with the environment variable name that could lead to runtime errors if incorrect. However, without strong evidence or additional context, it remains speculative.
2. main.py:9
- Draft comment:
The environment variableGOOGLE_API_KEYshould beOPENAI_API_KEYto match the expected variable for OpenAI API keys. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Marked as duplicate.
3. base.py:4
- Draft comment:
The client initialization is repeated in bothbase.pyandmain.py. Consider refactoring to avoid this repetition and adhere to the DRY principle. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:80%
The code inbase.pyandmain.pyis not DRY. The client initialization is repeated in both files, which violates the DRY principle.
4. main.py:7
- Draft comment:
The client initialization is repeated in bothbase.pyandmain.py. Consider refactoring to avoid this repetition and adhere to the DRY principle. - Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required:80%
The code inbase.pyandmain.pyis not DRY. The client initialization is repeated in both files, which violates the DRY principle.
Workflow ID: wflow_I44JKPYxFSavqrSt
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 5302263 in 15 seconds
More details
- Looked at
95lines of code in2files - Skipped
0files when reviewing. - Skipped posting
0drafted comments based on config settings.
Workflow ID: wflow_oa0dtVPdxvt5mKuU
You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.
Important
Removed
use_asyncflag fromfrom_cerebras()inclient_cerebras.pyand updatedcerebras_cloud_sdkversion.use_asyncflag fromfrom_cerebras()inclient_cerebras.py.use_asyncflag check withisinstance(client, AsyncCerebras)infrom_cerebras().cerebras_cloud_sdkversion to^1.11.0inpyproject.toml.base.py,main.py, andoutput.wav.This description was created by
for 5302263. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.