Fixing memory #112
Fixing memory #112
Conversation
…gine. This achieves: 1. User can use different llm for memory and engine. 2. In case user does not choose to use a different llm, memory will use the llm of parent engine. In ReadOnlyMemory, __init__ should not be defined (because of pydantic), when initializing ReadOnlyMemory use kwargs for memory param.
1. passing self.llm parameter to engine __init__ instead of __call__. 2. For some reason example was removed from summary template, it is added back in.
WalkthroughThe changes reflect an integration of a new Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 0
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Files selected for processing (4)
- nextpy/ai/engine/_program.py (3 hunks)
- nextpy/ai/memory/base.py (1 hunks)
- nextpy/ai/memory/read_only.py (1 hunks)
- nextpy/ai/memory/summary.py (3 hunks)
Additional comments: 14
nextpy/ai/memory/read_only.py (6)
- 11-16: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [9-9]
The class definition and the docstring clearly communicate the purpose of the
ReadOnlyMemoryclass. The removal of the__init__method simplifies the class and aligns with the intent of making it read-only.
11-13: The
add_memorymethod's docstring correctly indicates that it cannot edit read-only memory. However, it's important to ensure that this behavior is consistent with the rest of the system and that no functionality is broken due to the inability to add memory.11-16: > Note: This review was outside the patches, so it was mapped to the patch with the greatest overlap. Original lines [15-17]
The
get_memorymethod remains unchanged and should function as before, retrieving the entire memory from the store. This method does not modify memory, so it is consistent with the read-only nature of the class.
- 11-16: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [19-21]
The
remove_memorymethod's docstring also indicates that it cannot modify read-only memory. As withadd_memory, it's crucial to verify that the system does not rely on this method to modify memory.Verification successful
Based on the information provided by the execution of the shell scripts, there are no direct or indirect references to the
remove_memorymethod of theReadOnlyMemoryclass in the codebase. This suggests that the system does not attempt to use this method to modify memory, which aligns with the intended functionality of read-only memory.* 11-16: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [23-25]Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that no part of the system attempts to use the remove_memory method of ReadOnlyMemory ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'ReadOnlyMemory($_).remove_memory($_)'Length of output: 73
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check for any indirect references to the remove_memory method of ReadOnlyMemory # This includes variable assignments and passing the method as an argument ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'$.remove_memory($_)'Length of output: 56
The
clearmethod's docstring is consistent with the read-only nature of the class. It's important to verify that the system does not expect this method to clear any memory.
- 11-16: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [27-33]
The
memory_keysproperty is a useful addition, providing a list of all memory prompts. This does not modify memory and should be safe to use in a read-only context.nextpy/ai/memory/base.py (8)
17-17: The addition of the
llmattribute with a default value ofNoneallows for the specification of a large language model for memory operations. This is a significant change and should be checked for compatibility with existing memory operations.18-18: The
memory_thresholdattribute with a default value of1is a new addition that could be used to control when memory operations are triggered. It's important to verify that this threshold is being used appropriately throughout the system.Verification successful
The
memory_thresholdattribute is indeed being used in the system. It is set as a default parameter in theProgramclass within_program.pyand is assigned to thememory.memory_thresholdattribute of aPrograminstance. Additionally, inbuffer_summary.py, it is used to determine the number of messages to buffer, indicating that it controls when memory operations are triggered, as per the reviewer's comment.* 20-20: The `messages` attribute remains unchanged and should continue to function as the storage for all memories.Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that the memory_threshold attribute is correctly used throughout the system ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'BaseMemory($_).memory_threshold'Length of output: 68
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any usage of the memory_threshold attribute in the codebase rg "memory_threshold"Length of output: 584
- 14-21: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [22-24]
The
add_memorymethod is abstract and unchanged. It's important to ensure that subclasses implement this method correctly, especially with the newllmattribute in place.
- 14-21: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [26-28]
The
get_memorymethod is abstract and unchanged. It's important to ensure that subclasses implement this method correctly, especially with the newllmattribute in place.
- 14-21: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [30-32]
The
remove_memorymethod is abstract and unchanged. It's important to ensure that subclasses implement this method correctly, especially with the newllmattribute in place.
- 14-21: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [34-36]
The
clearmethod is abstract and unchanged. It's important to ensure that subclasses implement this method correctly, especially with the newllmattribute in place.Verification successful
The ast-grep search for any
clearmethods within the codebase has produced output, indicating that there are indeedclearmethods implemented in the files_diskcache.pyand_cache.pywithin thenextpy/ai/engine/llms/cachesdirectory. This suggests that the previous patterns were too specific or incorrect, as they did not yield results.Given this new information, it is clear that there are
clearmethods present in the codebase. However, the initial task was to verify that subclasses ofBaseMemoryimplement theclearmethod correctly, especially with the newllmattribute in place. Since the ast-grep pattern specifically looking for subclasses ofBaseMemorywith aclearmethod did not yield results, it is possible that either there are no such subclasses, or the pattern was not formulated correctly.To ensure that we have covered all bases, I will now attempt to search for subclasses of
BaseMemorywithout specifying theclearmethod, to verify if there are any subclasses at all. If subclasses are found, a manual check might be necessary to ensure they implement theclearmethod correctly in the context of the newllmattribute.
The ast-grep search for subclasses of
BaseMemoryhas identified two classes that extendBaseMemory:MockMemoryintest_base_agent.pyandReadOnlyMemoryinread_only.py. Both classes have aclearmethod implemented.For
MockMemory, theclearmethod is implemented with the functionality to clear all messages, as indicated by theself.messages.clear()call within the method. ForReadOnlyMemory, theclearmethod is present but does not perform any action, as indicated by thepassstatement and the docstring stating "cannot edit a read-only memory."Given this information, it can be concluded that the subclasses of
BaseMemorydo implement theclearmethod. However, theReadOnlyMemoryclass'sclearmethod is intentionally non-functional to maintain the read-only nature of the memory.The review comment mentioned the importance of ensuring that subclasses implement the
clearmethod correctly, especially with the newllmattribute in place. Since theReadOnlyMemoryclass'sclearmethod is not supposed to modify memory, the implementation is consistent with its intended functionality, and theMockMemoryclass'sclearmethod appears to be correctly implemented for its testing purposes.Based on the information gathered, the review comment is addressed, and the subclasses of
BaseMemoryhave been verified to implement theclearmethod as per their respective specifications.* 14-21: > Note: This review was outside the patches, and no patch overlapping with it was found. Original lines [38-44]Scripts Executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that subclasses of BaseMemory implement the clear method correctly ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'class $_ extends BaseMemory { $$$ clear() { $$$ } $$$ }'Length of output: 437
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Refine the ast-grep pattern to correctly search for subclasses of BaseMemory that implement the clear method ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'class $_(BaseMemory) { $$$ def clear($_): $$$ }'Length of output: 429
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any clear methods within the codebase to ensure the issue is not with the pattern itself ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'def clear($_): $$$'Length of output: 396
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for subclasses of BaseMemory to verify if there are any subclasses at all ast-grep --lang python --pattern $'class $_(BaseMemory): $$$'Length of output: 5734
The
memory_promptsproperty is unchanged and should continue to provide a list of prompts for all memories. This property does not modify memory and should be safe to use.
|
Looks good to me . Merging this with main |
fixing-memory branch
This pull request fixes the following problems related to ai.memory:
You can now pass parameters to engine to specify an llm for memory, else it will use the engine's llm.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation
Refactor