Add new formatting function "add"

[drewcorlin1]

Which problem is this PR solving?

In addition to #2501 and #2504, allowing any numbers (in my immediate case a date in microseconds since epoch) to be offset by a number is useful to allow users to see logs before/after their span/trace timestamps by a configurable offset.

Description of the changes

This adds a add function and gives the ability to chain formatting functions together (eg #{endTime | add 60000000 | epoch_micros_to_date_iso})

How was this change tested?

Unit tests and with the following UI config

const DEFAULT_CONFIG = {
  "linkPatterns": [
    {
      "type": "traces",
      "url": "https://myKibana/_dashboards/app/discover#/?_g=(time:(from:'#{startTime | shift_epoch_micros -60000000 | epoch_micros_to_date_iso}',to:'#{endTime | shift_epoch_micros 60000000 | epoch_micros_to_date_iso}'))&_a=(columns:!(_source),filters:!(('$state':(store:appState),meta:(alias:!n,disabled:!f,index:filebeat-all,key:json.traceId,negate:!f,params:(query:'42c7668cd8d887da'),type:phrase),query:(match_phrase:(json.traceId:'42c7668cd8d887da')))),index:filebeat-all)",
      "text": "Logs"
    }
  ]
};

Checklist

• I have read https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING_GUIDELINES.md
• I have signed all commits
• I have added unit tests for the new functionality
• I have run lint and test steps successfully
  • for jaeger-ui: yarn lint and yarn test

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.63%. Comparing base (a083195) to head (0aa811b).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2507   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.62%   96.63%           
=======================================
  Files         255      255           
  Lines        7707     7719   +12     
  Branches     2003     2004    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         7447     7459   +12     
  Misses        260      260           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[yurishkuro]

As described the use case doesn't make sense to me. How does an operator of Jaeger install know what possible time skew might exist?

I can see the other use case: you want to see the logs from +-1min of the span timestamp, and need to transform the ts into an interval. If that's what you meant please update the description.

As far as implementation, can this be simply an "add" function? It does not care about the units (up to the user), and by allowing negative arguments it can adjust ts in either direction.

[drewcorlin1]

I can see the other use case: you want to see the logs from +-1min of the span timestamp, and need to transform the ts into an interval. If that's what you meant please update the description.

Yes this is what I meant. Will update.

Good point about it just being add. Will rename to be more generic

[yurishkuro]

odd statement, NonNullable is compared against null?

I think you could use flatMap() instead and return [] in cases of errors such that it will be automatically skipped

[drewcorlin1]

This is a type predicate which says that it returns a boolean indicating if fn is non-null. It may make more sense reading it with a curly brace-wrapped function body

.filter((fn): fn is NonNullable<typeof fn> => {
  return fn !== null;
});

I could use flatMap, but would just add more allocations for the same behavior right?

[drewcorlin1]

I don't think I can add labels. @yurishkuro would you be able to add the "changelog:bugfix-or-minor-feature" label (or whatever you deem appropriate)