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
At the moment, each weight needs to be specified in advance to build the output dataframe. This makes the configuration files very long in many cases, and can lead to bugs if an important weight is missed out by mistake. It would be good to add a way to specify an expression which automatically identifies which branches should be used for weights, e.g. via a wildcard.
Risks / challenges
What is the right way to include and exclude weights via an expression
This potentially introduces a new "mini-language" if we need to be able to match some weights but not others
When is this list expanded?
If it is expanded at run-time, this breaks the static DAG workflow model
If it is expanded at launch-time, this requires a possible pre-expansion step and can only be done if 1) all files have the same branches, and 2) all branches are known in advance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
At the moment, each weight needs to be specified in advance to build the output dataframe. This makes the configuration files very long in many cases, and can lead to bugs if an important weight is missed out by mistake. It would be good to add a way to specify an expression which automatically identifies which branches should be used for weights, e.g. via a wildcard.
Risks / challenges
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: