Skip to content

Conversation

@daniel-romano-DD
Copy link
Contributor

Motivation

Changes

Workflow

  1. ⚠️ Create your PR as draft ⚠️
  2. Work on you PR until the CI passes
  3. Mark it as ready for review
    • Test logic is modified? -> Get a review from RFC owner.
    • Framework is modified, or non obvious usage of it -> get a review from R&P team

🚀 Once your PR is reviewed and the CI green, you can merge it!

🛟 #apm-shared-testing 🛟

Reviewer checklist

  • Anything but tests/ or manifests/ is modified ? I have the approval from R&P team
  • A docker base image is modified?
    • the relevant build-XXX-image label is present
  • A scenario is added, removed or renamed?

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jan 20, 2026

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

utils/build/docker/dotnet/weblog/Controllers/FeatureFlagEvaluatorController.cs  @DataDog/apm-dotnet @DataDog/asm-dotnet @DataDog/system-tests-core
manifests/dotnet.yml                                                    @DataDog/apm-dotnet @DataDog/asm-dotnet
utils/build/docker/dotnet/weblog/app.csproj                             @DataDog/apm-dotnet @DataDog/asm-dotnet @DataDog/system-tests-core

@daniel-romano-DD daniel-romano-DD changed the title [dotnet] Enable ffe for dotnet (temporary solution) [dotnet] Enable ffe for dotnet Jan 27, 2026
@daniel-romano-DD daniel-romano-DD marked this pull request as ready for review January 27, 2026 17:27
@daniel-romano-DD daniel-romano-DD requested review from a team as code owners January 27, 2026 17:27
Copy link

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8627086261

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +55 to +58
"BOOLEAN" => await _client.GetBooleanValueAsync(request.Flag, Convert.ToBoolean(request.DefaultValue), context),
"STRING" => await _client.GetStringValueAsync(request.Flag, request.DefaultValue?.ToString(), context),
"INTEGER" => await _client.GetIntegerValueAsync(request.Flag, Convert.ToInt32(request.DefaultValue), context),
"NUMERIC" => await _client.GetDoubleValueAsync(request.Flag, Convert.ToDouble(request.DefaultValue), context),

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Handle JsonElement defaults for non-string flag types

Here defaultValue is declared as object, so ASP.NET Core’s JSON binding will deserialize booleans/numbers into JsonElement, not bool/int/double. Convert.ToBoolean/ToInt32/ToDouble does not accept JsonElement, so any BOOLEAN/INTEGER/NUMERIC evaluation throws and is caught, returning the default without calling OpenFeature (reason becomes "ERROR"). That means non-string flags can never be evaluated (and exposure events won’t be generated) for requests that send JSON booleans or numbers.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@daniel-romano-DD daniel-romano-DD enabled auto-merge (squash) January 27, 2026 18:04
@daniel-romano-DD daniel-romano-DD merged commit 03ab479 into main Jan 27, 2026
246 checks passed
@daniel-romano-DD daniel-romano-DD deleted the dani/ffe-dotnet branch January 27, 2026 18:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants