Skip to content
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

Lookup table #596

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 21, 2025
Merged

Lookup table #596

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 21, 2025

Conversation

elshize
Copy link
Member

@elshize elshize commented Dec 18, 2024

This lookup table implementation is meant to replace the current lexicon
data structure. The overall concept is the same; the aim here is to
improve the binary format to allow for extensions, and to improve the
interaction with the table from the code, as well as naming convention.

This change includes the data structure implementing the mapping
concept, a CLI tool to build a table and read data from it, and a unit
test suite, as well as CLI tests.

In this particular change, we do not introduce any breaking changes. The
new code is not used in the already existing tools and workflows. This
work will be done in the future.

@elshize elshize marked this pull request as draft December 18, 2024 01:36
@elshize elshize self-assigned this Dec 18, 2024
@elshize elshize force-pushed the lookup-table branch 2 times, most recently from 0aba011 to aac2dbd Compare December 22, 2024 01:35
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 22, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.91%. Comparing base (43efd76) to head (a418c03).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #596      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.84%   93.91%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          81       82       +1     
  Lines        3897     3929      +32     
==========================================
+ Hits         3657     3690      +33     
+ Misses        240      239       -1     

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

@elshize elshize force-pushed the lookup-table branch 10 times, most recently from fc2f633 to 3f6d154 Compare January 12, 2025 23:32
@elshize elshize force-pushed the lookup-table branch 3 times, most recently from 0ffb456 to ed6febf Compare February 9, 2025 13:59
@elshize elshize marked this pull request as ready for review February 9, 2025 14:49
@elshize elshize requested a review from JMMackenzie February 9, 2025 14:49
@elshize elshize force-pushed the lookup-table branch 3 times, most recently from 5b3541a to 37531a3 Compare February 15, 2025 13:20
Copy link
Member

@JMMackenzie JMMackenzie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice, this looks great!

This lookup table implementation is meant to replace the current lexicon
data structure. The overall concept is the same; the aim here is to
improve the binary format to allow for extensions, and to improve the
interaction with the table from the code, as well as naming convention.

This change includes the data structure implementing the mapping
concept, a CLI tool to build a table and read data from it, and a unit
test suite, as well as CLI tests.

In this particular change, we do not introduce any breaking changes. The
new code is not used in the already existing tools and workflows. This
work will be done in the future.

Changelog-added: New lookup table implementation available
Signed-off-by: Michal Siedlaczek <[email protected]>
@elshize elshize merged commit 5dab328 into main Feb 21, 2025
9 checks passed
@elshize elshize deleted the lookup-table branch February 21, 2025 20:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants