[WIP] Add possibility to register functions in a type-safe manner #787
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pgerhard
force-pushed
the
typesafe-functions
branch
2 times, most recently
from
6fa6f9f
to
fe827f9
Compare
…ner in the ChatClient
…hatClient The advantage of this annotation over the existing approach is that it forces the definition of a description. Thereby reducing surprising errors at runtime and shortening feedback cycles for developers. This works with the existing code base
Created a new factory class that centralises the creation of Tools. It provides and API for creating Tools by - name - lambda - bean type
pgerhard
force-pushed
the
typesafe-functions
branch
from
fe827f9
to
cb5a2a5
Compare
|
Hi Christian (@tzolov), As discussed i've updated the PR with a way to define functions via a factory class. Compared to my initial implementation using the |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Goal: The goal of this PR is to extend the existing function registration methods to also accept types of beans. The advantage would be that this is type-safe. A type-safe interface improves intelli-sense and refactoring
Things to Do:
Discussion Points for this PR:
Should there be multiple factory methods for the ChatClient.Builder? So far I've overloaded the existing factory method and provided a
SimpleNameResolverfor use in existing callsGeneral Design Question:
At a higher level I am also wondering about how to register functions in general. The existing model make heavy use of annotations and conventions (e.g. a function must be a
java.util.Function). This clearly works, however issues non-obvious issues (e.g. missing@Descriptionannotation) are discovered at runtime. Personally I feel that this is not a great developer experience, especially for people new to the usingspring-ai. My preference would be to surface this kind of errors as quickly as possible. A way to address this could be to provide an interface that has to be implemented by beans that should be available as functions for the LLM