Clarify missing benchmark timing suite - #812
Merged
Merged
Conversation
morluto
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 8, 2026 07:06
|
Bugbot is not enabled for your account, so this pull request was not reviewed. Enable Bugbot in the Cursor dashboard to get automatic reviews on future PRs. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #722.
The timing-weight validation reads the live Harbor registry and previously selected a suite with a bare
next(). If dataset changes removed every suite with more than twelve tasks, the test failed with an opaqueStopIteration.The test now asserts the expected suite explicitly and includes the observed suite task counts in the failure message. Fixture-controlled
next()calls are intentionally unchanged.Validation:
make harbor-validation-tests TESTS=benchmarks/validation/test_benchmark_planner.pymake lint-full