在准备环境前提交次全部更改。
This commit is contained in:
134
docs/audit/prompt_logs/prompt_log_20260217_022912.md
Normal file
134
docs/audit/prompt_logs/prompt_log_20260217_022912.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,134 @@
|
||||
- [P20260217-022912] 2026-02-17 02:29:12 +0800
|
||||
- summary: CONTEXT TRANSFER: We are continuing a conversation that had gotten too long. Here is a summary: --- ## TASK 1: Enhance d…
|
||||
- prompt:
|
||||
```text
|
||||
CONTEXT TRANSFER: We are continuing a conversation that had gotten too long. Here is a summary:
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
## TASK 1: Enhance dataflow analysis scripts with field mapping columns and anchor links
|
||||
|
||||
**STATUS**: done
|
||||
|
||||
**USER QUERIES**: From previous conversation
|
||||
|
||||
**DETAILS**: Completed in earlier conversation. Added `dwd_tables`, `parse_table_map()`, `parse_fact_mappings()`, `build_field_mappings()` to `dataflow_analyzer.py`. Updated hook to v2.0.
|
||||
|
||||
**FILEPATHS**: `scripts/ops/dataflow_analyzer.py`, `.kiro/hooks/dataflow-analyze.kiro.hook`, `tests/test_dataflow_analyzer.py`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## TASK 2: Enhance report with business descriptions, sample values, JSON field counts, and diff report
|
||||
|
||||
**STATUS**: done
|
||||
|
||||
**USER QUERIES**: From previous conversation
|
||||
|
||||
**DETAILS**: Enhanced `dataflow_analyzer.py` and rewrote `gen_dataflow_report.py` to v3 with BD_manual descriptions, multi-sample display, enum detection, field diff report.
|
||||
|
||||
**FILEPATHS**: `scripts/ops/dataflow_analyzer.py`, `scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py`, `tests/test_dataflow_analyzer.py`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## TASK 3: Enhance 1.1 field diff report with clickable fields, detail sub-tables, bold unmapped rows
|
||||
|
||||
**STATUS**: done
|
||||
|
||||
**USER QUERIES**: From previous conversation
|
||||
|
||||
**DETAILS**: Rewrote `_write_field_diff_report()` in `gen_dataflow_report.py`. Summary table shows count + anchor links to per-table sub-tables. Nested objects use `<details>` collapse. Unmapped rows are bold. Added 10 tests in `TestFieldDiffSubTables`. All 84 tests passed.
|
||||
|
||||
**FILEPATHS**: `scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py`, `tests/test_dataflow_analyzer.py`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## TASK 4: Fix section numbering (1.1.x → incremental) and add "推测用途" + 置信度 columns to diff sub-tables
|
||||
|
||||
**STATUS**: in-progress
|
||||
|
||||
**USER QUERIES**: User asked: "第1章节号整理一下。各字段差异明细，根据上下文和表格作用，猜测字段作用，并将置信度标出。"
|
||||
|
||||
**DETAILS**:
|
||||
- Changed `1.1.x` to incremental `1.1.{sub_idx}` numbering in `_write_field_diff_report()` — DONE
|
||||
- Added `_FIELD_GUESS_RULES` list (regex pattern → purpose → confidence) and `_guess_field_purpose()` function — DONE
|
||||
- Added "推测用途" and "置信度" columns to all 5 sub-table types (flat unmapped, nested, ODS no JSON, ODS no DWD, DWD no ODS) — DONE
|
||||
- Updated `test_diff_subtable_title` test to check for `1.1.1` instead of `1.1.x` — DONE
|
||||
- Added `TestGuessFieldPurpose` (8 tests) and `TestDiffSubTablePurposeColumn` (4 tests) — DONE
|
||||
- **CRITICAL BUG FOUND AND PARTIALLY FIXED**: There were TWO duplicate `_FIELD_GUESS_RULES` definitions in the file. The first (correct) one has proper rule ordering (specific IDs like `tenant_id` before generic `_id$`). The second (old/duplicate) one had wrong ordering where `_id$` came before `tenant_id`, causing `tenant_id` to match as generic "关联实体 ID" instead of "租户/组织标识".
|
||||
- **LAST EDIT**: Successfully deleted the second duplicate `_FIELD_GUESS_RULES` and its duplicate `_guess_field_purpose` function via `strReplace`. The replacement was confirmed successful.
|
||||
- **NOT YET VERIFIED**: Tests have NOT been run after the duplicate deletion fix. The last test run showed 1 failure (`test_foreign_key`) due to the duplicate. Need to re-run tests to confirm the fix works.
|
||||
|
||||
**NEXT STEPS**:
|
||||
1. Run full test suite: `Set-Location C:\NeoZQYY ; python -m pytest tests/test_dataflow_analyzer.py -v --tb=short` to verify the duplicate deletion fixed the `test_foreign_key` failure
|
||||
2. If tests pass, verify no diagnostics issues on `scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py`
|
||||
3. Confirm all 96 tests pass (74 original + 10 diff sub-table + 8 guess purpose + 4 purpose column)
|
||||
|
||||
**FILEPATHS**: `scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py`, `tests/test_dataflow_analyzer.py`
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## USER CORRECTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS:
|
||||
- All prose/comments/docs in 简体中文; code identifiers stay English
|
||||
- Scripts go in `scripts/ops/`; tests in root `tests/`
|
||||
- This is NOT a high-risk path change (scripts/ops + tests), no `/audit` needed
|
||||
- Markdown `<details>` tags used for nested object collapse
|
||||
- ETL meta columns excluded from diff: `source_file`, `source_endpoint`, `fetched_at`, `payload`, `content_hash`
|
||||
- Report generated by 2-phase process: Python script collects data → `gen_dataflow_report.py` assembles Markdown
|
||||
- Anchors: `api-{table-name}`, `ods-{table-name}`, `dwd-{dwd-short-name}` (underscores → hyphens)
|
||||
- Diff anchors: `diff-{table-name}` (underscores → hyphens)
|
||||
- Shell working directory may drift — always use `Set-Location C:\NeoZQYY` before running root-level commands
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Architecture Context:
|
||||
- `dataflow_analyzer.py` — core collection module
|
||||
- `gen_dataflow_report.py` — report generator reading collected JSON, outputting Markdown
|
||||
- `_FIELD_GUESS_RULES` — ordered list of `(regex, purpose_text, confidence)` tuples; first match wins, so specific patterns must precede generic ones
|
||||
- `_guess_field_purpose(field_name, table_name, layer)` → `(purpose, confidence)` using `_re.search`
|
||||
|
||||
## Files to read:
|
||||
- `scripts/ops/gen_dataflow_report.py` — the main file being edited, verify the duplicate `_FIELD_GUESS_RULES` was properly removed (should only have ONE definition around line 63, and ONE `_guess_field_purpose` function)
|
||||
- `tests/test_dataflow_analyzer.py` — test file with new test classes `TestGuessFieldPurpose`, `TestDiffSubTablePurposeColumn`, `TestFieldDiffSubTables`
|
||||
|
||||
USER QUERIES(most recent first):
|
||||
1. 继续
|
||||
2. Output:
|
||||
Command executed successfully with no output.
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 0
|
||||
3. Output:
|
||||
Command executed successfully with no output.
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 0
|
||||
4. 继续
|
||||
5. Output:
|
||||
Command executed successfully with no output.
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 0
|
||||
6. Output:
|
||||
Command executed successfully with no output.
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 0
|
||||
7. 第1章节号整理一下。各字段差异明细，根据上下文和表格作用，猜测字段作用，并将置信度标出。
|
||||
8. Output:
|
||||
Hook execution failed with exit code 1.
|
||||
|
||||
Error output:
|
||||
[AUDIT REMINDER] Pending audit detected (root-file, dir:admin-web, dir:backend, dir:etl, dir:miniprogram, dir:db, db-schema-change). Run /audit (Manual: Run /audit hook) to sync docs & write audit artifacts. (rate limit: 15min)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 1
|
||||
9. Output:
|
||||
Command executed successfully with no output.
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 0
|
||||
10. Output:
|
||||
Command executed successfully with no output.
|
||||
|
||||
Exit Code: 0
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
METADATA:
|
||||
The previous conversation had 6 messages.
|
||||
|
||||
INSTRUCTIONS:
|
||||
Continue working until the user query has been fully addressed. Do not ask for clarification - proceed with the work based on the context provided.
|
||||
IMPORTANT: you need to read from the files to Read section
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user