@GrounderUK , are you still seeing this behavior? When I run this function with input 1 set to True and all others set to False, I get an error.

Still worth investigating, but I want to try to reproduce your bug. If we're getting incorrect results, that might mean we have a scope attachment error in the orchestrator. Errors are probably symptomatic of something less serious.

In T361654#9688889, @cmassaro wrote:

@GrounderUK , are you still seeing this behavior?

Yes I am, I’m afraid 🤷‍♂️ You do need to Try the implementation rather than the function; other implementations succeed or time out.

Ah! I see. I was running it with all of the Boolean argument values set.

I have no idea what the backend sees when a Boolean argument is uninitialized on the frontend. @gengh , do you know what a Boolean looks like when neither of the radio buttons has been selected? Is it

{
    "Z1K1": "Z40",
    "Z40K1": ""
}

? Or something else?

In T361654#9690806, @cmassaro wrote:

Ah! I see. I was running it with all of the Boolean argument values set.

It doesn’t matter, only inputs 1 and 2 are mapped. I changed it deliberately to confirm that it is a problem with the mapping rather than the Composition itself. An earlier version maps them correctly and still manifests the error. https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Z14717?uselang=en&oldid=95554

Current version

Original version

I am trying to figure out whether this is a scoping issue in the orchestrator or a problem with the composition-based implementation itself. I'm running this locally and logging all the nested function calls. At one point, I see this:

{'name': 'Z12684K1',
 'argument': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
   'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
   'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
  'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
   'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
  'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
    'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
    'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
   'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
    'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
   'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
     'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
     'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
    'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
     'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
    'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
      'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
      'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
     'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
      'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K2'}},
     'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
       'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
       'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
      'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
       'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
      'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
        'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
        'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
       'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
        'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
       'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
         'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
         'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
        'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
         'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
        'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
          'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
          'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}},
         'K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z18'},
          'Z18K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z6', 'Z6K1': 'Z11849K1'}},
         'K2': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z7'},
           'Z7K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z881'},
           'Z881K1': {'Z1K1': 'Z9', 'Z9K1': 'Z40'}}}}}}}}}}}}

There is a function that gets called with a list of 8 Booleans. All of them are references to Z11849K1 except for the fourth, which is set to Z11849K2. This seems strange--I would have expected references to Z11849K1-8.

I can keep digging next week to see if this is due to the orchestrator's scoping, but I wanted to see if you were familiar with this implementation and maybe had any ideas.

Yes, it is strange. When https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Z14717?uselang=en&oldid=95554 (which is mapped as you would expect) produced erroneous results, I changed the composition so that all eight elements were mapped from the first argument (set to True). Then I set the second argument to False and tried changing the mapping for each element in turn. This confirmed that when its value was mapped into any of the first three elements, the implementation evaluated correctly to False, but if its value was mapped to any element from the fourth to the eighth, the implementation evaluated incorrectly to True.

Sorry, it seems I provided the wrong link to https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z14718 in the initial report. I created this tester to call Z12684 (are all True) with a Typed list of Booleans in which the fourth element is False. Its call correctly evaluates to False. From the JSON provided above, it looks like that is exactly what is about to happen here, because Z11849K1 is/should be True and Z11849K2 is/should be False.

Please feel free to revert to https://www.wikifunctions.org/wiki/Z14717?uselang=en&oldid=95554 at any time. I’d do it myself, but I don’t want to add to the confusion.

I created a comparable error with a sandbox implementation here: https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15106.

Somehow, arguments after the third are not resolved and are returned as Z18s in a reversed list of Strings.

So I created a sandbox composition with echo, and this works correctly. https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15160

That’s a built-in, of course, (with alternative implementations disconnected) whereas the initial reversing implementation might be Python or JavaScript. I created similar echo compositions using:

1. a function with a single implementation, in JavaScript: https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15355 and
2. a function with a single implementation, in Python: https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15364

In both these cases (unlike the built-in echo) arguments 4, 5, and 6 are unresolved in the returned list. I hope that helps with pinpointing the problem.

Hmm, okay. So what are the ZIDs of a function and implementation that should currently work but don't? How can I reproduce the bug right now?

In T361654#9695734, @cmassaro wrote:

Hmm, okay. So what are the ZIDs of a function and implementation that should currently work but don't? How can I reproduce the bug right now?

Function Z15104 has two failing implementations: Z15355 and Z15364

In T361654#9695514, @GrounderUK wrote:

…compositions using:

1. a function with a single implementation, in JavaScript: https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15355 and
2. a function with a single implementation, in Python: https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15364

https://www.wikifunctions.org/view/en/Z15104

apine opened https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/repos/abstract-wiki/wikifunctions/function-orchestrator/-/merge_requests/156

Continue eager evaluation for local keys that have already been seen.

ecarg merged https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/repos/abstract-wiki/wikifunctions/function-orchestrator/-/merge_requests/156

Continue eager evaluation for local keys that have already been seen.

Change #1020837 had a related patch set uploaded (by Jforrester; author: Jforrester):

[operations/deployment-charts@master] wikifunctions: Upgrade orchestrator 2024-04-04-132719 to 2024-04-17-125039

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/1020837

Change #1020837 merged by jenkins-bot:

[operations/deployment-charts@master] wikifunctions: Upgrade orchestrator 2024-04-04-132719 to 2024-04-17-125039

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/1020837