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
First of all thanks for the module!
It was not immediately available to me that priorities of rules are not as I'd expect them to be.. usually priority 1 is higher priority than priority 2 , 3 , etc.
On debugging my code, I discovered that the order of rules evaluation starts from the highest number.. thisHolder.activeRules array orders by higher numbers first.
This might just be semantic, but often priority with lower numbers precede the higher numbers because they are considered high importance, also in many situations we do not know the number of rules in advance , so it is much easier to just start from 1 ..
i know this can be a breaking change but I just thought to mention in case others have not noticed it too..
I also noted that the wiki explains that higher number priorities are evaluated first, but I must admit I did not read it initially and have not paid enough attention, as I thought priority 1 means higher priority ..
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
First of all thanks for the module!
It was not immediately available to me that priorities of rules are not as I'd expect them to be.. usually priority 1 is higher priority than priority 2 , 3 , etc.
On debugging my code, I discovered that the order of rules evaluation starts from the highest number..
thisHolder.activeRules
array orders by higher numbers first.This might just be semantic, but often priority with lower numbers precede the higher numbers because they are considered high importance, also in many situations we do not know the number of rules in advance , so it is much easier to just start from 1 ..
i know this can be a breaking change but I just thought to mention in case others have not noticed it too..
I also noted that the wiki explains that higher number priorities are evaluated first, but I must admit I did not read it initially and have not paid enough attention, as I thought priority 1 means higher priority ..
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: