Repository navigation
fix(flags): compare numeric string properties numerically - #1088
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your trial has ended. Reactivate Greptile to resume code reviews.
This was referenced Oct 19, 2026
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approved.
The evaluation-contract change has independent assurance on the current head. The behavior matches the disclosed intent, and no unresolved substantive concerns or other refusal grounds were identified.
- Author wrote 0% of the modified lines and has 10 merged PRs in these paths (familiarity MODERATE).
- PostHog Review (Standard) reviewed the current head: no findings.
- greptile-apps[bot] reviewed the current head.
Gate mechanics and policy version
| Gate | Result | |
|---|---|---|
| prerequisites | ✓ | all clear |
| deny-list | ✓ | no deny categories matched |
| size | ✓ | 61L, 1F substantive, 289L/3F incl. docs/generated/snapshots — within ceiling |
| tier | ✓ | T1-agent / T1c-medium (289L, 3F, two-areas, fix) |
| stamphog 2.6.0 | .stamphog/policy.yml @ 7918d99 · reviewed head 7918d99 |
Contributor
posthog-python Compliance ReportDate: 2026-10-19T23:29:54.470550+00:00 ✅ All Tests Passed!121/121 tests passed Capture_V1 Tests✅ 95/95 tests passed View Details
Capture_Ai Tests✅ 5/5 tests passed View Details
Feature_Flags Tests✅ 17/17 tests passed View Details
Feature_Flags_Local_Evaluation Tests✅ 4/4 tests passed View Details
|
turnipdabeets
approved these changes
Oct 20, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
💡 Motivation and Context
Local
gt,gte,lt, andltecomparisons could order numeric strings lexicographically, changing flag membership relative to remote evaluation. For example,"10" gt 2should match and"100" lt 30should not.Use complete ASCII decimal parsing and finite binary64 comparison, following the shared SDK specification. Existing numeric JSON filter operands remain supported alongside the spec's string operands. Invalid actual values are definitive no-matches; invalid conditions remain inconclusive and retain existing remote-fallback eligibility. Preserves existing native
Decimalproperty support through binary64 conversion.Fixes #1077. Part of the coordinated Python, Ruby/Rails, PHP and Java server correction.
Related SDK PRs:
💚 How did you test it?
Repository-wide lint/format and the checked-in API snapshot checks have existing failures. Scoped baseline comparisons show no introduced lint diagnostics or public API changes.
Regression coverage checks all four operators, numeric/string operands, strict parsing, non-finite values, rounding, null/missing properties and local-only versus remote fallback. The same regressions were checked across the affected SDKs. Scoped patch release metadata is included because evaluated membership can change.
📝 Checklist
🤖 Agent context
Autonomy: Human-driven (agent-assisted)
Implemented with Pi and isolated SDK workers. Ran
simplifyand the pre-PR review loop with fresh read-only reviewers; shared findings were checked against all four SDKs. Human review is still required.