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

Processing blocks with multiple Inputs #181

Closed
schlingling opened this issue Feb 26, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

Processing blocks with multiple Inputs #181

schlingling opened this issue Feb 26, 2023 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@schlingling
Copy link
Contributor

schlingling commented Feb 26, 2023

Jayvee should process blocks with multiple inputs.

          Note that multiple outputs are already implemented, so for `ArchiveInterpreter` it should work out of the box. For multiple inputs, the execution logic in the interpreter needs to be modified. It is located in this method:

async function runPipeline(
pipeline: Pipeline,
runtimeParameters: Map<string, string | number | boolean>,
loggerFactory: LoggerFactory,
): Promise<ExitCode> {

After it has been implemented, the validation, that prevents multiple inputs, needs to be removed:

} else if (pipes.length > 1 && whatToCheck === 'input') {
for (const pipe of pipes) {
accept(
'error',
`At most one pipe can be connected to the ${whatToCheck} of a ${block.type}`,
{
node: pipe,
property: 'to',
},
);
}

Let me know whether you need help with the implementation, we can do a pair programming session if you want.

Originally posted by @felix-oq in #116 (comment)

@schlingling schlingling added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 26, 2023
@schlingling schlingling changed the title Note that multiple outputs are already implemented, so for ArchiveInterpreter it should work out of the box. For multiple inputs, the execution logic in the interpreter needs to be modified. It is located in this method: Processing blocks with multiple Inputs Feb 26, 2023
@georg-schwarz
Copy link
Member

Closed in favor of #512

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants