You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This ticket is to find some way to reduce the confusion around the is_logic function. I think the expectation is that the is_logic function is validating the logic, but the function does not do that. Instead, the function is more answering the question of "is this variable something that should be interpreted as logic, versus some other thing like a primitive type.
At present, there is no robust way to validate that logic is valid, where "valid" means when the logic is executed it will not fail because of syntax or sematic errors. For example, if you execute an if logic with 0 parameters or 4 parameters there is nothing stopping you.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The
is_logic
function seems to cause some confusion. Here are relevant conversations:This ticket is to find some way to reduce the confusion around the
is_logic
function. I think the expectation is that theis_logic
function is validating the logic, but the function does not do that. Instead, the function is more answering the question of "is this variable something that should be interpreted as logic, versus some other thing like a primitive type.At present, there is no robust way to validate that logic is valid, where "valid" means when the logic is executed it will not fail because of syntax or sematic errors. For example, if you execute an
if
logic with 0 parameters or 4 parameters there is nothing stopping you.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: