Skip to content

draft: sketched out SO interface CI workflow.#798

Draft
tristpinsm wants to merge 35 commits intomainfrom
so-interface-ci
Draft

draft: sketched out SO interface CI workflow.#798
tristpinsm wants to merge 35 commits intomainfrom
so-interface-ci

Conversation

@tristpinsm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@tristpinsm tristpinsm commented Sep 24, 2024

Description

Draft of github CI workflow to enforce compliance with the SO interface document here.

This is just a sketch and the code needs to be fleshed out, tested and documented.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the core Changes to the core code, which is used in the server application label Sep 24, 2024
@tristpinsm tristpinsm requested a review from swh76 September 24, 2024 23:31
@tristpinsm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

I just sketched out how this could work, but this could be a project for Andy.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@tristpinsm tristpinsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is really starting to take shape! I took a quick look and left a few comments, but I can give it a closer look later on and once we've had a chance to discuss. Have you tried running this on the code?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@tristpinsm tristpinsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added some more comments to the code.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the client Changes to the client code label Mar 8, 2025
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@tristpinsm tristpinsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Here's a first round of review :)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@tristpinsm tristpinsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi Andy, this is looking great! I think functionally this is all good, but I left some more suggestions and comments that I think could improve the clarity and usability of the code. This is maybe a bit of a pedantic exercise, but hopefully helps you hone those best practices.

Let me know if you have any questions, and definitely if you disagree with any of the suggestions.

if check == "incorrectdefaults":
raise Exception("Mismatch for defaults in function "+node.name+" occurred in file: "+fname)
try:
assert compare_args(child, interface[fname][node.name][node.name])
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there should probably be just one indexing of node.name here?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@tristpinsm tristpinsm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Noted a few more small fixes to make, but then we should be good to merge.

tests/.DS_Store Outdated
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

remove this before we merge

# in principle, we could have functions defined in the body (though I don't think we do in this case)
if node.name in interface[fname]:
try:
assert compare_args(child, interface[fname][node.name][node.name])
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there should probably be just one indexing of node.name here?

tests/.DS_Store Outdated
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this file is still here...

@tristpinsm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@swh76 I can't approve this PR because I was originally the author, but I think it looks good to go. If you'd like to take a look, feel free, but we'll need your approval to merge (squash merge I think in this case).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

client Changes to the client code core Changes to the core code, which is used in the server application

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants