Python a2ui_core: Add basic catalog function implementations by nan-yu · Pull Request #1576 · a2ui-project/a2ui

nan-yu · 2026-06-08T23:35:14Z

Description

Replace this paragraph with a description of what this PR is changing or adding, and why. Consider including before/after screenshots.

List which issues are fixed by this PR. For larger changes, raising an issue first helps reduce redundant work.

Pre-launch Checklist

I signed the CLA.
I read the Contributors Guide.
I read the Style Guide.
I have added updates to the CHANGELOG.
I updated/added relevant documentation.
My code changes (if any) have tests.
If my branch is on fork, I have verified that scripts/e2e_test.sh passes.

If you need help, consider asking for advice on the discussion board.

…tion

…catalog components

- Implement ExpressionParser mirroring the TypeScript version to support dynamic formatString placeholders. - Add basic catalog function implementations (arithmetic, comparison, logical, string, formatting, and validation).

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:35:29Z

Warning

Gemini encountered an error creating the review. You can try again by commenting /gemini review.

nan-yu · 2026-06-08T23:46:49Z

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request introduces the a2ui_core Python library, which provides core data models, reactive state management, and JSON schema validation logic for the A2UI protocol (v0.9+). It includes auto-generated component and function schemas, an expression parser, basic catalog function implementations, and comprehensive unit tests. The review feedback highlights several critical issues: negative numbers are not correctly parsed as number literals in the expression parser, a recursion depth check is missing in parse_expression, the date formatter lacks support for several documented TR35 tokens, division by zero is not handled correctly for negative or zero numerators, and redundant float conversions exist in the arithmetic implementations.

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:48:49Z

+        if self.is_digit(scanner.peek()):
+            return self.parse_number_literal(scanner)


Negative numbers (e.g., -10) are currently not recognized as number literals because the check only looks for digits. As a result, they fall through to scan_path_or_identifier and are parsed as data paths (e.g., {"path": "-10"}). Update the condition to also match a leading minus sign followed by a digit.

Suggested change

if self.is_digit(scanner.peek()):

return self.parse_number_literal(scanner)

if self.is_digit(scanner.peek()) or (scanner.peek() == "-" and self.is_digit(scanner.peek(1))):

return self.parse_number_literal(scanner)

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:48:49Z

+    def parse_number_literal(self, scanner: Scanner) -> Union[int, float]:
+        start = scanner.pos
+        while not scanner.is_at_end() and (
+            self.is_digit(scanner.peek()) or scanner.peek() == "."
+        ):
+            scanner.advance()
+        num_str = scanner.input[start : scanner.pos]
+        return float(num_str) if "." in num_str else int(num_str)


To correctly parse negative number literals, update parse_number_literal to consume the leading minus sign if present.

Suggested change

def parse_number_literal(self, scanner: Scanner) -> Union[int, float]:

start = scanner.pos

while not scanner.is_at_end() and (

self.is_digit(scanner.peek()) or scanner.peek() == "."

):

scanner.advance()

num_str = scanner.input[start : scanner.pos]

return float(num_str) if "." in num_str else int(num_str)

def parse_number_literal(self, scanner: Scanner) -> Union[int, float]:

start = scanner.pos

if scanner.peek() == "-":

scanner.advance()

while not scanner.is_at_end() and (

self.is_digit(scanner.peek()) or scanner.peek() == "."

):

scanner.advance()

num_str = scanner.input[start : scanner.pos]

return float(num_str) if "." in num_str else int(num_str)

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:48:49Z

+    def parse_expression(self, expr: str, depth: int = 0) -> Any:
+        expr = expr.strip()
+        if not expr:
+            return ""


The recursion depth limit check is missing in parse_expression. Because parse_expression is called recursively for nested interpolations (e.g., ${${foo}}), an excessively nested expression can cause a RecursionError or stack overflow. Add the depth check at the entry of parse_expression.

Suggested change

def parse_expression(self, expr: str, depth: int = 0) -> Any:

expr = expr.strip()

if not expr:

return ""

def parse_expression(self, expr: str, depth: int = 0) -> Any:

if depth > self.MAX_DEPTH:

raise ValueError("Max recursion depth reached in parse")

expr = expr.strip()

if not expr:

return ""

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:48:49Z

+        dt = datetime.datetime.fromisoformat(str(val).replace("Z", "+00:00"))
+        if fmt == "ISO":
+            return dt.isoformat().replace("+00:00", ".000Z")
+        py_fmt = (
+            str(fmt)
+            .replace("yyyy", "%Y")
+            .replace("MM", "%m")
+            .replace("dd", "%d")
+            .replace("HH", "%H")
+            .replace("mm", "%M")
+            .replace("ss", "%S")
+        )
+        return dt.strftime(py_fmt)


The current _format_date implementation only replaces a small subset of the documented TR35 tokens (yyyy, MM, dd, HH, mm, ss). Standard tokens like yy, MMM, MMMM, EEEE, E, d, H, hh, h, and a are ignored, leading to broken formatting. Additionally, literal % characters in the format string can cause strftime errors. Update the replacement mapping to support all documented TR35 tokens and escape % characters.

dt = datetime.datetime.fromisoformat(str(val).replace("Z", "+00:00")) if fmt == "ISO": return dt.isoformat().replace("+00:00", ".000Z") py_fmt = ( str(fmt) .replace("%", "%%") .replace("yyyy", "%Y") .replace("yy", "%y") .replace("MMMM", "%B") .replace("MMM", "%b") .replace("MM", "%m") .replace("M", "%m") .replace("EEEE", "%A") .replace("E", "%a") .replace("dd", "%d") .replace("d", "%d") .replace("HH", "%H") .replace("H", "%H") .replace("hh", "%I") .replace("h", "%I") .replace("mm", "%M") .replace("ss", "%S") .replace("a", "%p") ) return dt.strftime(py_fmt)

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:48:49Z

+DivideImplementation = create_function_implementation(
+    DivideApi,
+    lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (
+        math.inf
+        if _to_float(args["b"]) == 0
+        else (
+            int(_to_float(args["a"]) / _to_float(args["b"]))
+            if (_to_float(args["a"]) / _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()
+            else (_to_float(args["a"]) / _to_float(args["b"]))
+        )
+    ),
+)


The division implementation always returns math.inf when dividing by zero, regardless of the sign of the numerator a. If a is negative, it should return -math.inf, and if a is zero, it should return math.nan. Refactor the implementation to handle these cases correctly and avoid redundant conversions.

def _divide(args, context=None, abort_signal=None): a = _to_float(args["a"]) b = _to_float(args["b"]) if b == 0: if a > 0: return math.inf elif a < 0: return -math.inf else: return math.nan res = a / b return int(res) if res.is_integer() else res DivideImplementation = create_function_implementation(DivideApi, _divide)

gemini-code-assist · 2026-06-08T23:48:49Z

+AddImplementation = create_function_implementation(
+    AddApi,
+    lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (
+        int(_to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"]))
+        if (_to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()
+        else (_to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"]))
+    ),
+)
+
+SubtractImplementation = create_function_implementation(
+    SubtractApi,
+    lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (
+        int(_to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"]))
+        if (_to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()
+        else (_to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"]))
+    ),
+)
+
+MultiplyImplementation = create_function_implementation(
+    MultiplyApi,
+    lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (
+        int(_to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"]))
+        if (_to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()
+        else (_to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"]))
+    ),
+)


The Add, Subtract, and Multiply implementations perform redundant float conversions and arithmetic operations (evaluating the same expression up to three times). Refactor them to use helper functions that perform the calculation once.

Suggested change

AddImplementation = create_function_implementation(

AddApi,

lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (

int(_to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"]))

if (_to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()

else (_to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"]))

),

)

SubtractImplementation = create_function_implementation(

SubtractApi,

lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (

int(_to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"]))

if (_to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()

else (_to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"]))

),

)

MultiplyImplementation = create_function_implementation(

MultiplyApi,

lambda args, context=None, abort_signal=None: (

int(_to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"]))

if (_to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"])).is_integer()

else (_to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"]))

),

)

def _add(args, context=None, abort_signal=None):

res = _to_float(args["a"]) + _to_float(args["b"])

return int(res) if res.is_integer() else res

AddImplementation = create_function_implementation(AddApi, _add)

def _subtract(args, context=None, abort_signal=None):

res = _to_float(args["a"]) - _to_float(args["b"])

return int(res) if res.is_integer() else res

SubtractImplementation = create_function_implementation(SubtractApi, _subtract)

def _multiply(args, context=None, abort_signal=None):

res = _to_float(args["a"]) * _to_float(args["b"])

return int(res) if res.is_integer() else res

MultiplyImplementation = create_function_implementation(MultiplyApi, _multiply)

nan-yu added 3 commits June 8, 2026 23:31

Initialize a2ui_core python package with README and project configura…

4575e3d

…tion

feat: initialize agent SDK core with schema definitions and basic UI …

45f5fdc

…catalog components

Add basic catalog function implementations

bc0fc30

- Implement ExpressionParser mirroring the TypeScript version to support dynamic formatString placeholders. - Add basic catalog function implementations (arithmetic, comparison, logical, string, formatting, and validation).

github-project-automation Bot added this to A2UI Jun 8, 2026

github-project-automation Bot moved this to Todo in A2UI Jun 8, 2026

gemini-code-assist Bot reviewed Jun 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Python a2ui_core: Add basic catalog function implementations#1576

Python a2ui_core: Add basic catalog function implementations#1576
nan-yu wants to merge 3 commits into
a2ui-project:mainfrom
nan-yu:re-arch-3

nan-yu commented Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot commented Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

nan-yu commented Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant

		if self.is_digit(scanner.peek()):
		return self.parse_number_literal(scanner)

Conversation

nan-yu commented Jun 8, 2026

Description

Pre-launch Checklist

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot commented Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

nan-yu commented Jun 8, 2026

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist Bot Jun 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

1 participant