On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 4:17 PM Zexuan Luo wrote:
> What about `not or` and `not and`? We can allow space in the operator.
>
this style is better than before. seems good for me. ^_^
>
> YuanSheng Wang 于2020年11月26日周四 下午2:59写道：
>
> > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 2:34 PM Zexuan Luo
> wrote:
> >
> >
What about `not or` and `not and`? We can allow space in the operator.
YuanSheng Wang 于2020年11月26日周四 下午2:59写道：
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 2:34 PM Zexuan Luo wrote:
>
> > I mean using `!or` to represent `not (xxx or xxx)`, and so do `!and`.
> >
>
> I think it is not easy for developers understand
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 2:34 PM Zexuan Luo wrote:
> I mean using `!or` to represent `not (xxx or xxx)`, and so do `!and`.
>
I think it is not easy for developers understand this.
>
> YuanSheng Wang 于2020年11月26日周四 下午2:15写道：
>
> > one question, do we support the operator `!or`, `!and` ?
> >
>
I mean using `!or` to represent `not (xxx or xxx)`, and so do `!and`.
YuanSheng Wang 于2020年11月26日周四 下午2:15写道：
> one question, do we support the operator `!or`, `!and` ?
>
> it is not easy to understand for me :(
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 12:28 PM Zexuan Luo
> wrote:
>
> > Personally speaking,
one question, do we support the operator `!or`, `!and` ?
it is not easy to understand for me :(
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 12:28 PM Zexuan Luo wrote:
> Personally speaking, I think the SO way is more readable. Because the
> logical operator is the same level with the conditions, therefore we can
>
Personally speaking, I think the SO way is more readable. Because the
logical operator is the same level with the conditions, therefore we can
know the conditions and the operator are in the same expression.
Chao Zhang 于2020年11月25日周三 下午5:36写道：
> The expression in Stack Overflow is good, but the
The expression in Stack Overflow is good, but the readability is not
satifactory,
what about modifying it to make it more hierarchical? For example,
promoting the level of
logical operators.
Chao Zhang
https://github.com/tokers
On November 25, 2020 at 4:04:29 PM, YuanSheng Wang (membp...@apache.o
So you mean
```
[
"!AND", -- optional
["arg_name","==","yaml"],
[
"!OR",
["arg_name","==","json"],
["arg_weight",">",10]
]
]
```
for the `not` logical operator?
YuanSheng Wang 于2020年11月25日周三 下午4:03写道：
> I think we can mainly use `array
I got this idea from Stack Overfollow[1]
[1]
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20737045/representing-logic-as-data-in-json
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 4:02 PM YuanSheng Wang wrote:
> I think we can mainly use `array`, I write a new style.
>
> this style can be compatible with the old rules.
>
>
I think we can mainly use `array`, I write a new style.
this style can be compatible with the old rules.
[
"AND", -- optional
["arg_name","==","yaml"],
[
"OR",
["arg_name","==","json"],
["arg_weight",">",10]
]
]
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020
Currently we support a DSL to match routes with variables:
```
[
["arg_name","==","json"],
["arg_weight",">",10],
["arg_weight","!",">",15]
]
```
is evaluated to `ngx.var.arg_name == "json" and ngx.var.arg_weight > 10
and not ngx.var.arg_weight > 15`.
It would be better if the DSL c
11 matches
Mail list logo
