Thanks, Wyclif. I plan on attending the call.
Tammy
On 4/2/2012 2:37 PM, Wyclif Luyima wrote:
The work to expose rules as calculations was done during the sprint
though there might me a few changes to me made in line with your
concerns.
As mike put it, these additions don't in any way impose the new design
to a consumer of the next release of logic but rather adds support
for those who wish to use the new design and wrapper classes, it up to
you the as the chica team to go with best suits you,
We are going to discuss your 2 concerns during this week's design call.
Wyclif
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Tammy Dugan <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I finally had a chance to look at all the new logic code. First I
need to vent about a couple of things and then I will try to be
constructive:
* It took us MONTHS to get the last rewrite of logic to work
correctly with openmrs 1.7.x and the chica code
* We just got it working at the end of October 2011 and Openmrs
started rewriting it again in November 2011.
* The first round of design calls for the logic rewrite happened
in mid-November. I had a two week old baby and did not have time
to deal with it.
* Looking back through dev emails, the logic discussion ended at
the end of November and picked up in mid February
* In mid-February was the first time I saw anything about
Calculation.
* On March 5th there was a dev list email from Darius that he and
Mike would be here for one day and wanted to meet with me and some
other people
* I was still on part-time maternity leave but rearranged my
schedule with one days notice to meet with them
* When I met with them, I struggled to understand the logic design
that I had not looked at since I had only been back at work for 2
weeks after maternity leave
* In that meeting, Darius asked us if we could own logic.
Basically we were supposed to own something that got completely
redesigned that we had little or no input into the design that
didn't make any sense to us and stuff that had been fixed
repeatedly was broken yet again.
Based on all this, you can see why I might be a little irritated.
Yes, I know you tried to include me in the design but you knew I
was pretty much unavailable. Yes, I could have said no when Darius
said we should own logic but I felt backed into a corner. There
was a breakdown in communication on several fronts. If I would
have know we were expected to own logic, I would have said no to
the rewrite to begin with.
Venting done. Now to be constructive:
* The name Calculation is a horrible name for that object. It
doesn't calculate anything! Why not call it "RuleDefinition" since
it defines the properties of the rule and then call
CalculationEvaluator "Rule"? Why was Rule split into two objects
anyway? Why not just add a getParameterDefinitionSet method to the
rule interface? Why would you ever want some object that doesn't
evaluate anything being called by logic? What is the point in that?
* I think the strongly typed results and ParameterDefinitionSets
are nice changes
* Logic cannot hit the database for every token lookup. This is an
unacceptable performance hit for a system like chica. The tokens
need to be cached.
* CalculationEvaluators and Calculations should not be singletons.
Making them singletons is non-thread safe and requires special
programming that is not intuitive to the naive programmer. A new
instance should be created each time.
For a naive programmer, I think the new design complicates things
even more than before and makes it even less accessible for
developers to contribute.
In summary, if the chica group is going to own logic, we would be
willing to own the 0.5 logic that we worked so hard to getting
working. We are not willing to put the time and effort in to get
the new calculation version of logic working.
Thanks,
Tammy
On 3/29/2012 11:29 AM, Michael Seaton wrote:
Hi Tammy,
Is this an issue in the Calculation module? Or is this an issue
with how logic is exposing itself to Calculation? Weren't you
involved in the coding changes that took place during the
Sprint? That was meant to be for you and the Chica team to
contribute and own, not for anyone to impose on you.
It does seem we should cache calculation registrations in memory,
we are not doing this currently. But this shouldn't necessarily
be an issue for Chica, if it is going to the
logic_token_registration table for it's own purposes, should it?
I don't really see how exposing Logic to Calculation is a risk
for you, as long as you continue to access Logic natively as you
always have and just provide a couple of adapter classes to
expose it for other via the Calculation module.
Mike
On 03/29/2012 11:05 AM, Tammy Dugan wrote:
There were two major issues that came up when reviewing the
changes with Wyclif,
1. Logic cannot hit the database for every token lookup. This is
an unacceptable performance hit for a system like chica. The
tokens need to be cached.
2. Rules should not be singletons. Making them singletons is
non-thread safe and requires special programming that is not
intuitive to the naive programmer. A new instance should be
created each time.
I also want to point out that we have fixed #2 twice already in
previous versions and now it needs to be fixed for a third time.
Also, #1 was fixed in the previous version and now has to be
fixed again. It gets frustrating that these same problems keeps
getting reintroduced each time logic is refactored and each time
I have to make the case about why it should be that way and we
have to fix the problem. It is important when refactoring to
preserve the old behavior!
Because of these issues, we have no immediate plans to update
chica to use the new version of logic with Calculations. It took
us months to get things working before and we just don't have
the programming resources to do it now or in the near future.
Thanks,
Tammy Dugan
On 3/29/2012 10:08 AM, Friedman, Roger (CDC/CGH/DGHA) (CTR) wrote:
It appears that trunk produces 0.5.3 which includes
Calculation, last branch is 0.5.1 which is not mavenized, 0.5.2
is mavenized, can it be a branch even if not released?
*From:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Wyclif Luyima
*Sent:* Friday, March 23, 2012 3:53 PM
*To:* [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [OPENMRS-DEV] Calculation sprint wrap up
Hi everyone,
For the past 2 weeks, we have been having a sprint on the
calculation module plus making logic and reporting to expose
themselves as calculations. We managed to get all the 27
tickets specific to the module done by Wednesday. Some work has
been done to retrofit logic and reporting to be exposed as
calculations, i went through the changes in logic with Tammy
and Win this afternoon, Tammy had some interesting points of
discussion which i believe she will send on the dev list.
In general, the code looks pretty good and i think we are ready
for its 1.0 release which could be in the next 1 -2 weeks,
apparently we have to wait for final high level reviews from
Darius and Burke as contributors to its design to confirm if it
is actually what they envisioned.
The sprinter turn up was good which included the core
developers, Mike and Mykola, thank you all for your relentless
work.
Have a great weekend.
Wyclif
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>
from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>
from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
--
Tammy Dugan
CHIRDL Technical Lead
Children's Health Services Research
IU School of Medicine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>
from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>
from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
--
Tammy Dugan
CHIRDL Technical Lead
Children's Health Services Research
IU School of Medicine
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l> from
OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to unsubscribe
<mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l>
from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list
--
Tammy Dugan
CHIRDL Technical Lead
Children's Health Services Research
IU School of Medicine
_________________________________________
To unsubscribe from OpenMRS Developers' mailing list, send an e-mail to
[email protected] with "SIGNOFF openmrs-devel-l" in the body (not
the subject) of your e-mail.
[mailto:[email protected]?body=SIGNOFF%20openmrs-devel-l]
