You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As described in #30, the current mindset regarding compound filter is like this:
Mindset: a CompoundFilter is also a FilterChain i.e when using compound triggers, we get tiny filter chains inside our topmost filterchain, which consist of targetgroup checker, trigger checker, constraint checker etc.
Thus, we must/can rely on the filter operations next and disregard to realize the OR and AND filters.
In #30, we attempted to implement an Triggerchecker filter for the compound OR Trigger, while sticking to the current design. In the end, the presented solution works, but violated the (implicit) contracts of the FilterChain class.
Thus, we want to refactor the Triggerchecker for the compound triggers, such that they do not extend the FilterChain class.
Goal
come up with a reasonable design
implement the solution
Pitfalls resp. things to keep in mind.
Compound Triggers can be nested, i.e. we can have a compound OR-Trigger nested into an AND-Trigger, nested into an OR-Trigger and so on.
Currently, logical operators AND, OR and XOR are supported by SPD.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Follow up issue for #30.
As described in #30, the current mindset regarding compound filter is like this:
In #30, we attempted to implement an Triggerchecker filter for the compound OR Trigger, while sticking to the current design. In the end, the presented solution works, but violated the (implicit) contracts of the
FilterChain
class.Thus, we want to refactor the Triggerchecker for the compound triggers, such that they do not extend the
FilterChain
class.Goal
Pitfalls resp. things to keep in mind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: