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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Support recursions in a function #1014

Merged
merged 26 commits into from
Mar 26, 2019
Merged

Support recursions in a function #1014

merged 26 commits into from
Mar 26, 2019

Conversation

gaoning777
Copy link
Contributor

@gaoning777 gaoning777 commented Mar 21, 2019 •
edited by jlewi
Loading

As suggested during the design review, global pipelineparam does not seem to be a good solution.
This PR uses a graph_component decorator to support a recursive function calls in DSL, which supports do-while loops.

This change is Reviewable

gaoning777 added 15 commits March 17, 2019 11:10
@hongye-sun hongye-sun self-assigned this Mar 21, 2019
hongye-sun
hongye-sun reviewed Mar 22, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@hongye-sun hongye-sun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we several basic tests to verify the behavior? I am still familiar myself with the compiler code. I will probably add more comments tonight.

@gaoning777 gaoning777 mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2019
Merged
@gaoning777
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm adding unit tests now to verify the behaviors and making the CR easier.

@gaoning777
fix the bug of opsgroup name
035078e 
adjust the graph_component usage example
fix index bugs
use with statement in the graph_component instead of directly calling
the enter/exit functions
hongye-sun
hongye-sun reviewed Mar 25, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@hongye-sun hongye-sun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@hongye-sun
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@gaoning777
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gaoning777

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

1 similar comment
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gaoning777

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm label Mar 26, 2019
@gaoning777
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test

@hongye-sun
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 8c09090 into kubeflow:master Mar 26, 2019
@gaoning777 gaoning777 deleted the resolve-io-in-graph-component branch March 26, 2019 21:28
Linchin pushed a commit to Linchin/pipelines that referenced this pull request Apr 11, 2023
@gkcalat
Upgrade to kfp 2.0.0-alpha.4 (kubeflow#1014)
07c06fc
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Ark-kun Ark-kun Ark-kun left review comments

@hongye-sun hongye-sun hongye-sun left review comments

Assignees

@hongye-sun hongye-sun

Labels
approved lgtm size/XL
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@gaoning777 @hongye-sun @k8s-ci-robot @Ark-kun