Return 449 status code if the Domain is not stored or missing in the … #1104
Conversation
|
|
rasa_sdk/executor.py
Outdated
| @@ -162,6 +166,8 @@ def __init__(self) -> None: | |||
| self.actions: Dict[Text, Callable] = {} | |||
| self._modules: Dict[Text, TimestampModule] = {} | |||
| self._loaded: Set[Type[Action]] = set() | |||
| self.domain: Dict[Text, Any] = {} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have you considered to use None instead of empty dict and empty string below?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought it was more safe to have these variables be of the type it is expected. It's also how variables above are defined. You want to differentiate a case where if it's None at first it means that there is no Domain information, and if it is {} and "" later, the Domain information is there, it's just empty Domain, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yea, I was thinking about clearly differentiating case when there is a domain (whether it may be empty or not) and when there is no domain info at all.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Noted, makes sense to me, I'll update and test it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had to update the typing to use Optional[...] so that None value can be accepted. This resulted in additional changes so that the code can pass the Code Quality check, like removing ActionCall as typing and using Dict[Text, Any] (which is the correct type for action_call.
rasa_sdk/executor.py
Outdated
| """ | ||
| return bool(self.domain_digest) and self.domain_digest == domain_digest | ||
|
|
||
| def get_domain( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Word get suggests that the method is not doing any mutation of the data while in fact it is. It is mutating the state of the parent object.
I would suggest to explore different name like: upsert_domain or update_domain etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are right. Though this method is not just "upserting" the Domain, it's also returning the result. Should the naming match that behavior as well? What would you name it in that case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I updated the method name to update_and_return_domain to clearly state that we are making changes to the domain fields of the parent object AND also returning the domain.
Also updated the docstring to describe this in a more precise manner.
|
Spike got approved, closing this PR, will be used as the inspiration for the implementation. |
Proposed changes:
Status (please check what you already did):
black(please check Readme for instructions)