Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

.NET AgentChat #4561

Draft
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

.NET AgentChat #4561

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

lokitoth
Copy link
Member

@lokitoth lokitoth commented Dec 5, 2024

Abstractions

  • ICodeExecutor
  • IChatAgent
  • ITeam
  • ITaskRunner
  • ITerminationCondition
  • Messages
    • These need to be protobuff
    • Validate that they match latest version of pyAgentChat (since it is not always clear which actual type is going through the python)

Agents

  • Basic infrastructure
  • AssistantAgent
  • CodeExecutorAgent
  • CodingAssistantAgent
  • ToolUseAssistantAgent
  • SocietyOfMindAgent
  • UserProxyAgent

Teams

  • Basic infrastructure
  • RoundRobinGroupChat
  • SelectorGroupChat
  • SwarmGroupChat
  • MagenticOne
    • infrastructure
    • (not sure we want this?) agentis?

Other tasks

  • Flesh out missing Terminations

GroupChat[Manager]Base
[ ] protobuf the messages, otherwise cannot call into Publish()
[ ] flesh out Reset()

[ ] Other group chat strategies
@@ -171,6 +171,8 @@ public List<string> Subscribe(string topic)
}
}
};

// TODO: Should this be async?
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

was purposefully not sync - but should have a try/catch/error handling or retry - we want to make sure that subscriptions complete because if we think they are there but aren't there yet we may miss messages we thought we were getting...probably better ways to handle this.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Right, that makes sense.

I would still consider having an Async method under the hood that could be used in an async context (and also provide the Sync method which does this same kind of direct wait on SubscribeAsync) is that it will avoid locking up a thread that the async framework thinks belongs to it - since in an async context await (awaitable) will block the logical flow until the result, similar to .Wait() in a synchronous context.

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.

2 participants