standardised format of json rule output

[Soph1514]

Creating standardised json output of rules where every piece of information is a key value pair. At first I tried to use sort_json_object but it led to the keys being sorted not in a logical, consequential order. Separate functionsort_json_ruleswas developed to sort the json objects to allow standardisation of the output.

[niklasdewally]

The formatting is much better!

We might want to keep expressions as raw AST output (as we have now) instead of in the pretty form. This allows us to more closely monitor changes on the internal representation of expressions.

Alternatively, we could store both forms.

[Soph1514]

By AST output do you mean the one we have in the "human rule traces" files?

The formatting is much better!

We might want to keep expressions as raw AST output (as we have now) instead of in the pretty form. This allows us to more closely monitor changes on the internal representation of expressions.

Alternatively, we could store both forms.

[ozgurakgun]

I think we should keep the AST form only (as opposed to both) human readable version is in the txt files anyway.

[Soph1514]

That makes sense. I just thought you wanted both the last time we talked. I should have asked before proceeding with the pr. Should I uncomment the changes or just delete the branch?

[ozgurakgun]

Sorry I don't think I was being clear. @niklasdewally was suggesting/asking whether we want two versions of the JSON files. I was responding to that, I agree with what he said about using raw AST output in the JSON files instead of pretty. We still want the JSON version you worked on here.

To be concrete, I am suggesting we print the AST instead of a pretty printed version like the following:

    "initial_expression": "(-(3) % -(2) = -(1))",

[Soph1514]

O, I got confused and thought we wanted to fully remove the json rules now. I am glad we still need it.

So to be clear, everything is fine, I just to remove pretty printing the value associated with the JSON keys?

[niklasdewally]

So to be clear, everything is fine, I just to remove pretty printing the value associated with the JSON keys?

Yes: the changes to the layout of the file are good, but instead of printing the model in essence-like syntax, we want it to be like the output of input.expected-rewrite.serialised.json

[ozgurakgun]

Yes, in the above example instead of (-(3) % -(2) = -(1)) it would be something that mentions Mod, Eq, Neg etc.

[Soph1514]

[
  {
    "fields": {
      "initial_expression": "Sum(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, [Max(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, [Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Reference(UserName(\"a\"))), Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Reference(UserName(\"b\")))]), Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Literal(Int(1)))])",
      "new_top": "[AuxDeclaration(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, MachineName(0), Max(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, [Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Reference(UserName(\"a\"))), Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Reference(UserName(\"b\")))]))]",
      "rule_name": "\"flatten_vecop\"",
      "rule_set": "[(\"Minion\", 4400)]",
      "transformed_expression": "Sum(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, [Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Reference(MachineName(0))), Atomic(Metadata { clean: false, etype: None }, Literal(Int(1)))])"
    }
  },
  {

Is this fine? I tried to make the values for initial_expression, transformed_expression and new_top to be in a layered format like in input.expected-rewrite.serialised.json but couldn't figure it out since I am working with strings at the stage of formatting and not Expression/RuleResult struct.

Also the order of the keys is not very logical but I used sort_json_object so it would be standardised. I could implement a custom sorting if needed.

[Soph1514]

I tried the Value approach but it would not compile when I enabled the "unstable" feature. Turns out everything is simpler than we thought. I just experimented printing to the console until I achieved the desired format and plugged it into the trace. I removed json() filter in the subscriber layer (that is what was causing problems) and just pass a formatted json object when calling trace!.

from conjure_oxide/tests/integration/minion_constraints/sumgeq/input-expected-rule-trace.json
[
  {
    "initial_expression": {
      "Geq": [
        {
          "Atomic": [
            {
              "Reference": {
                "UserName": "z"
              }
            },
            {
              "clean": false,
              "etype": null
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "Sum": [
            [
              {
                "Atomic": [
                  {
                    "Reference": {
                      "UserName": "x"
                    }
                  },
                  {
                    "clean": false,
                    "etype": null
                  }
                ]
              },
              {
                "Atomic": [
                  {
                    "Reference": {
                      "UserName": "y"
                    }
                  },
                  {
                    "clean": false,
                    "etype": null
                  }
                ]
              }
            ],
            {
              "clean": false,
              "etype": null
            }
          ]
        },
        {
          "clean": false,
          "etype": null
        }
      ]
    },
    "rule_name": "introduce_sumgeq",
    "rule_set": [
      [
        "Minion",
        4400
      ]
    ],
    "transformed _expression": {
      "FlatSumGeq": [
        [
          {
            "Reference": {
              "UserName": "x"
            }
          },
          {
            "Reference": {
              "UserName": "y"
            }
          }
        ],
        {
          "Reference": {
            "UserName": "z"
          }
        },
        {
          "clean": false,
          "etype": null
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  {
    "Number of rules applied": 1
  }
]

[Soph1514]

trace!(
      target: "rule_engine",
      "{}",
  json!({
      "rule_name": result.rule.name,
      "rule_set": result.rule.rule_sets,
      "initial_expression": serde_json::to_value(initial_expression).unwrap(),
      "transformed _expression": serde_json::to_value(&red.new_expression).unwrap()
  })