Disjoin Operation #457
Open
Disjoin Operation #457
Conversation
This file contains 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
BRAVO68WEB
pushed a commit
to BRAVO68WEB/CyberChef
that referenced
this pull request
May 29, 2022
[ARCH] Multi-architecture Docker image
mattnotmitt
suggested changes
Feb 17, 2024
Comment on lines
+29
to
+33
| { | ||
| "name": "Split delimiter", | ||
| "type": "binaryShortString", | ||
| "value": "\\n" | ||
| }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why does this operation need to split? I think I'd prefer using Fork and then Disjoin. No need to have the same capability in both.
| break; | ||
| } else { | ||
| const subRec = new Recipe(); | ||
| subRec.addOperations(opList[i]); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
addOperations takes a list of operations, should probably be
subRec.addOperations[opList[i]]
| const recipe = subRecList[i]; | ||
|
|
||
| // Take a deep(ish) copy of the ingredient values | ||
| const ingValues = recipe.opList.map(op => JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(op.ingValues))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could use structuredClone instead
| constructor() { | ||
| super(); | ||
|
|
||
| this.name = "Disjoin"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Still not sure how I feel about the name Disjoin. Perhaps Concurrently?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Adds in the "Disjoin" operation, which attempts to satisfy the operation requested in issue #424.
I say attempts, as I'm not really sure how other types of flow operations should affect/be affected by this operation. For example, if one of the proceeding operations was a "jump" operation. I made a test out of the example provided in the issue, and that passes, but I was a little unsure of the full utility that the operation could provide, and would love to see more examples of this in order to fully flush it out.
I also heavily modeled the code based on the "Fork" operation's implementation, and there were a few things in there that I'm not sure are necessary for this operation that were present in the "Fork" operation. So, I would love a code review to look for things that were unnecessarily copied over. Just let me know! Thanks!