Skip to content

Expose generic eval runtime#6

Open
olivermt wants to merge 1 commit into
ash-project:mainfrom
olivermt:evals
Open

Expose generic eval runtime#6
olivermt wants to merge 1 commit into
ash-project:mainfrom
olivermt:evals

Conversation

@olivermt

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • add AshLua.Eval as a generic runtime API for manifest resolution, docs, and script execution
  • let eval surfaces resolve from namespace action labels and cache eval manifests with preload_eval_manifests!/1
  • document using AshLua as a transport-agnostic runtime for MCP/custom LLM loops

Checks

  • mix deps.get
  • mix compile
  • MIX_ENV=test mix test
  • mix check --no-retry

Builds on #5; once that merges, this PR should reduce to the follow-up eval/runtime commit.

@zachdaniel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

That PR is merged, not sure what this changes (or really why, as the description is light on that context), can you pull into this branch?

@olivermt

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I thought there was a dependency but I can't find it now, so to be honest I am not quite sure what I meant :S
PR is good to go from my side as-is!
I also rebased in the conflicts.

Comment thread lib/ash_lua/surface.ex
end

defp eval_manifest_cache_enabled? do
:persistent_term.get(@eval_manifest_cache_enabled_key, false)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why do we need to check in persistent term if it's enabled? I think we could just have like a cache?: true option when generating these. EvalActions would then do it by default (good idea).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants