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

Make possible to explicitly request "parameters" #15

Open
sebhoerl opened this issue Dec 22, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

Make possible to explicitly request "parameters" #15

sebhoerl opened this issue Dec 22, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@sebhoerl
Copy link
Contributor

Currently, a stage like this will obtain either a value that has directly been passed by a child stage or a value that comes from the global pipeline configuration:

def configure(context):
   value = context.config("abc")

In some cases, we don't want to rely on the global pipeline configuration (because we want to explicitly make sure that this stage is called with a well-chosen argument). Currently, there is no way to enforce a parameter to by passed from another stage rather from global configuration. Therefore, I'd propose to have:

def configure(context):
   value = context.config("abc", parameter = True)

In this case the option becomes a "parameter" to the stage. This requires some moving around of code internally in the pipeline, but should not be awfully complicated.

@sebhoerl sebhoerl added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 22, 2019
@davibicudo
Copy link
Contributor

I faced an issue where synpp crashes in cases where both parent and child have different setting for a parameter with the same name, e.g. "write_output" is False for child but for parent it is True. This enhancement could also fix it.

@sebhoerl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, I guess that it crashes currently is good, as the values should be passed down, and otherwise we get a mix-up. So yes, this could be a solution, because it makes it explicit. And when some config value is a "parameter" we should require that it is passed explicitly. I can have a look at it at some point. Or do you want to give it a try? :)

@davibicudo
Copy link
Contributor

Currently I'm tight on time for anything non mission-critical, but I'd surely be glad to contribute here eventually. I'll let you know beforehand :)

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