-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
Fix relative ordering in a complex transitive cases #242
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
14 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c3ad027
Topological sorting for relative ordering.
victor-nexthop 155250c
Topological sorting: add warning for impossible combination of rel+ab…
victor-nexthop b792b7a
Allow items with both absolute and relative markers to be reordered
victor-nexthop e04750e
Fix: Allow items with both absolute and relative markers to be reordered
victor-nexthop 3a3e63c
Fix: skip topological resort when no relative constraints exist
victor-nexthop f259605
Pre-screen impossible mark combinations.
victor-nexthop 487a103
[pre-commit.ci] auto fixes from pre-commit.com hooks
pre-commit-ci[bot] f30a168
Vibed a fix for "Combination of absolute and relative ordering" desig…
victor-nexthop 21875a5
This wasn't really needed.
victor-nexthop 6f88ef6
Restore the failure in test_failed_tests_after_dependency_loop
victor-nexthop d53281e
Addressed review comments.
victor-nexthop 4e5530c
reading self.rel_marks/dep_marks from _sort_by_topology() broke tests…
victor-nexthop 0b0749f
[pre-commit.ci] auto fixes from pre-commit.com hooks
pre-commit-ci[bot] 125d485
remove excess mention of "relative vs absolute conflict" - this is th…
victor-nexthop File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this merits a patch release after it is merged.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Speaking of a patch. This may be a breaking change, because:
tests.test_relative_ordering.test_dependency_loopandtests.test_relative_ordering.test_failed_tests_after_dependency_loopfail on the new code.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, I still think of it as a bug fix. I know you are thinking of Hyrum's Law, but you just made cases possible that before have been handled (incorrectly) as a dependency loop. If somebody relied on that behavior to prevent some implied ordering, I certainly wouldn't bother about it...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also the warning was missing before, so it just improved the visibility of an incorrect marker.