fix(volcengine): miss </think> in multiple think round by DeepSeek v3.1 thinking mode#2195
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @leslie2046, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request resolves a formatting bug within the Volcengine MAAS plugin, specifically addressing the DeepSeek v3.1 thinking mode. The core issue involved the occasional omission of the "" closing tag, which could lead to malformed output when the LLM was processing multi-round thoughts. By introducing a dedicated helper function to meticulously manage the Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request addresses an issue with missing </think> tags in the Volcengine provider's thinking mode by introducing new logic to wrap reasoning content. The changes look mostly correct and should fix the reported problem. I've identified a potential data loss bug where response content might be discarded during the reasoning phase, and also suggested a minor simplification to make the new code more readable. The dependency and manifest version bumps are appropriate for this fix.
|
CC @hjlarry could you please help me to take a look |
Related Issues or Context
fixes #2185
before:
after:
This PR contains Changes to Non-Plugin
This PR contains Changes to Non-LLM Models Plugin
This PR contains Changes to LLM Models Plugin
Version Control (Any Changes to the Plugin Will Require Bumping the Version)
VersionField, Not in Meta Section)Dify Plugin SDK Version
dify_plugin>=0.3.0,<0.6.0is in requirements.txt (SDK docs)Environment Verification (If Any Code Changes)
Local Deployment Environment
SaaS Environment