Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: add proof predicate evaluation #931

Conversation

CarolineLCa
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Evaluates if proof predicates are satisfied. If not satisfied, displays an error message.

IMG_0086

Related Issues

N/A

Pull Request Checklist

Tick all boxes below to demonstrate that you have completed the respective task. If the item does not apply to your this PR check it anyway to make it apparent that there's nothing to do.

  • All commits contain a DCO Signed-off-by line (we use the DCO GitHub app to enforce this);
  • Updated LICENSE-3RD-PARTY.md for any added dependencies or vendored components;
  • Updated documentation as needed for changed code and new or modified features;
  • Added sufficient tests so that overall code coverage is not reduced.

If you have any questions to any of the points above, just submit and ask! This checklist is here to help you, not to deter you from contributing!

Pro Tip 🤓

  • Read our contribution guide at least once; it will save you a few review cycles!
  • Your PR will likely not be reviewed until all the above boxes are checked and all automated tests have passed.

PR template adapted from the Python attrs project.

Signed-off-by: Caroline Lucas Calheirani <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Caroline Lucas Calheirani <[email protected]>
@CarolineLCa CarolineLCa requested a review from a team as a code owner August 14, 2023 22:19
@CarolineLCa CarolineLCa changed the title Feat/adding predicate checking Feat/adding proof predicate evaluation Aug 14, 2023
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 14, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #931 (e70e674) into main (60c9ceb) will increase coverage by 2.59%.
The diff coverage is 78.43%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #931      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   52.37%   54.97%   +2.59%     
==========================================
  Files         178      178              
  Lines        4987     5024      +37     
  Branches     1374     1393      +19     
==========================================
+ Hits         2612     2762     +150     
+ Misses       2355     2241     -114     
- Partials       20       21       +1     
Files Changed Coverage Δ
packages/legacy/core/App/localization/en/index.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
packages/legacy/core/App/localization/fr/index.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ckages/legacy/core/App/localization/pt-br/index.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
packages/legacy/core/App/screens/ProofRequest.tsx 66.10% <76.08%> (+25.82%) ⬆️
...gacy/core/App/components/misc/CredentialCard11.tsx 90.16% <100.00%> (+15.37%) ⬆️
packages/legacy/core/App/types/record.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (+25.00%) ⬆️

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes

Signed-off-by: Caroline Lucas Calheirani <[email protected]>
@bryce-mcmath bryce-mcmath changed the title Feat/adding proof predicate evaluation feat: add proof predicate evaluation Aug 17, 2023
@knguyenBC
Copy link
Contributor

Is it possible to change the wording so it's more plain language? for example: The content above from "you do not have data that satisfies the predicate" to: "You do not meet the requirements of this proof request from [verifier name]" and the message below the attribute from "Predicate not satisfied" to "Requirement not met"?

Copy link
Contributor

@bryce-mcmath bryce-mcmath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great work. Can we get this up to date with main next week so we can merge it in?

@bryce-mcmath bryce-mcmath merged commit d2308fb into openwallet-foundation:main Aug 21, 2023
5 checks passed
@CarolineLCa CarolineLCa deleted the feat/adding-predicate-checking branch September 29, 2023 13:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants