gagb
gagb
@0xRaduan -- thanks for the PR. @afourney @jackgerrits @0xRaduan, I love this PR, but I am worried about the code duplication because of asynchronous tests. What if we stuck with...
> Hey @gagb - good feedback, I agree. > > In general, this async code is just a wrapper over sync code [[1](https://github.com/microsoft/markitdown/pull/32/files#diff-7405f619a8ecc0b22b53b22a3cfcfd1fc92c62aea6e08de97674c8bbdd9bb949R42-R44)], so technically you don't need to have...
@0xRaduan can you fix the precommit and test errors
> Bundling the requirements with the function is a super good idea. However, if these functions weren't executed as "tools" but were shipped into the code execution environment then this...
> Just one early comment: `functions` instead of `function_store`? People typically associate the word `store` with either a data store or an app store. fixed.
> The @ requires decorator is super interesting. > > I note that we are in the same situation for many contrib agents that are now added as optional dependencies...
> @gagb Ok, I added a ton more comments based on my experience experimenting with this last night. Awesome! This is so useful! Will fix and report back!
@jackgerrits check if you need this for UDFs and take appropriate actions -- add to roadmap/close.
Good observation. I think you can always implement a user proxy like agent that executes these functions in the fashion that you'd like!
Yup that makes sense! Thanks!