ADRs on basic architectural principles#167
Merged
nergal-perm merged 12 commits intomasterfrom Jun 30, 2025
Merged
Conversation
manual: transferred most of the ADR created in feature/rewrite branch, because it was written in a much more concise way
manual: transferred the ADR created in feature/rewrite branch, because it was written in a much more concise way
prompt: Why do you suppose that the keys for the ExecutionContext's inner map should be Objects? How does this compare to the String keys? If it is a significant decision, then create an ADR for that. manual: transferred the ADR created in feature/rewrite branch, because it was written in a much more concise way
prompt: The thing that bothers me is that ValueProviders are meant to be implemented as generics, while the real value type cannot be known at the time of graph construction, at least for some Providers. How can this problem be solved? I don't like the idea of specifying concrete types in decision table's file, because that would couple logic to the implementation. Help me find the solution.
prompt: How should we discover the type for constant ValueProviders? Say, we have a condition written down in decision table file like this: `user.age > 40`. How do we know that `40` here is Integer, and not a String, or Double, or LocalDate?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR introduces a standard ADR template and a series of architecture decision records (ADRs) covering core principles of the decision engine’s design.
- Add a reusable ADR template for future records
- Create ADRs 0001 through 0008 documenting key architectural decisions
- Include project guidelines (GEMINI.md) and an example environment file
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 12 out of 13 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| doc/adr/templates/template.md | New ADR template skeleton |
| doc/adr/0001-record-architecture-decisions.md | ADR 0001: record architecture decisions |
| doc/adr/0002-separation-of-engine-and-connectors.md | ADR 0002: separate engine core and connectors |
| doc/adr/0003-shared-component-management-and-evaluation-optimization.md | ADR 0003: shared component graph model |
| doc/adr/0004-execution-context-key-strategy.md | ADR 0004: execution-context keying strategy |
| doc/adr/0005-pure-functional-core.md | ADR 0005: pure functional core |
| doc/adr/0006-valueprovider-design-for-remote-data-and-composability.md | ADR 0006: composable ValueProvider design |
| doc/adr/0007-type-discovery-at-graph-construction-time.md | ADR 0007: type discovery at graph build time |
| doc/adr/0008-type-inference-for-constants.md | ADR 0008: contextual type inference for constants |
| doc/GEMINI.md | Project ADR usage and linking guidelines |
| GEMINI.md | High-level project overview and goals |
| .env.example | Sample environment variable file |
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)
doc/adr/0008-type-inference-for-constants.md:19
- [nitpick] Wrap the literal value "40" in backticks (e.g.,
`"40"`) to match the inline code formatting used elsewhere and improve readability.
In decision table expressions like `user.age > 40`, the literal value "40" is parsed as a string. For the `DecisionEngine` to perform a correct, type-safe comparison, it must know the intended type of this literal (e.g., `Integer`, not `String` or `Double`). The engine needs a reliable strategy to determine the correct type for such constants without requiring explicit type declarations in the decision table, which would clutter the syntax and couple the logic to specific types. This is the logical continuation of the type-safety problem addressed in ADR-0007.
Author: Github Copilot Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.