JOJ/JOJ3-config-generator
27
1
Fork 0
Code Issues 3 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

dev #10

Merged
李衍志523370910113 merged 238 commits from dev into master 2025-03-05 16:20:39 +08:00
Conversation 16 Commits 238 Files Changed 42 +12 -12
1 changed files with 12 additions and 12 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
Showing only changes of commit 34ce4b0e13 - Show all commits

24
joj3_config_generator/processers/task.py
View File

@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ from typing import Any, Callable, Dict, List, Tuple
from joj3_config_generator.models import result, task
from joj3_config_generator.models.common import Memory, Time
from joj3_config_generator.models.const import JOJ3_CONFIG_ROOT
from joj3_config_generator.models.task import Parser as parser_enum
from joj3_config_generator.models.task import Parser as ParserEnum
jon-lee marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-05 15:23:44 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

ParserEnum

`ParserEnum`
def get_conf_stage(
@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ def get_conf_stage(
if parser in processed_dict:
fn, parser_model = processed_dict[parser]
jon-lee marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-03 11:54:43 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

should loop through conf_stage.parsers here and update the with field according to the parser name.

should loop through `conf_stage.parsers` here and update the `with` field according to the parser name.
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-03-03 13:36:23 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

I think its already implemented in each of the fix_parsers functions

I think its already implemented in each of the `fix_parsers` functions
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-03 13:43:12 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

No, do not find the parser in the fix_xxx function. Instead, iterate through the parsers here and decide how to fill in the with.

No, do not find the parser in the `fix_xxx` function. Instead, iterate through the parsers here and decide how to fill in the `with`.
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-03-03 16:17:53 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

resolved.

resolved.
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-04 03:02:45 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Use a dict to store parser name, field, function to process.

    process_dict: Dict[
        str, Tuple[Callable[[result.ParserConfig, BaseModel], None], BaseModel]
    ] = {
        "clangtidy": (fix_keyword, task_stage.clangtidy),
        "keyword": (fix_keyword, task_stage.keyword),
        "diff": (fix_diff, task_stage.diff),
    }
    for i, parser in enumerate(task_stage.parsers):
        if parser in process_dict:
            func, parser_model = process_dict[parser]
            func(conf_stage.parsers[i], parser_model)
Use a dict to store parser name, field, function to process. ``` process_dict: Dict[ str, Tuple[Callable[[result.ParserConfig, BaseModel], None], BaseModel] ] = { "clangtidy": (fix_keyword, task_stage.clangtidy), "keyword": (fix_keyword, task_stage.keyword), "diff": (fix_diff, task_stage.diff), } for i, parser in enumerate(task_stage.parsers): if parser in process_dict: func, parser_model = process_dict[parser] func(conf_stage.parsers[i], parser_model) ```
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-03-04 14:46:40 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

resolved.

resolved.
fn(parser_model, conf_stage.parsers[idx])
jon-lee marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-05 03:51:41 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

Do we need to support both kinds of names?

Do we need to support both kinds of names?
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-03-05 08:42:25 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

probably yes, since it is easy for new ta to type it wrong

probably yes, since it is easy for new ta to type it wrong
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-05 09:00:28 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

parsers name should be a str enum, force them to use the correct names

parsers name should be a str enum, force them to use the correct names
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-03-05 09:09:46 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

ok, then removed.

ok, then removed.
elif parser == parser_enum.DIFF:
elif parser == ParserEnum.DIFF:
jon-lee marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-02-23 22:32:35 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

underscore

underscore
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-02-25 11:02:24 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

fixed

fixed
fix_diff(
task_stage,
conf_stage.parsers[idx],
@ -47,18 +47,18 @@ def get_conf_stage(
def get_processed_dict(
task_stage: task.Stage,
) -> Dict[parser_enum, Tuple[Callable[[Any, result.Parser], None], Any]]:
) -> Dict[ParserEnum, Tuple[Callable[[Any, result.Parser], None], Any]]:
processed_dict: Dict[
parser_enum, Tuple[Callable[[Any, result.Parser], None], Any]
ParserEnum, Tuple[Callable[[Any, result.Parser], None], Any]
] = {
parser_enum.CLANG_TIDY: (fix_keyword, task_stage.clangtidy),
parser_enum.KEYWORD: (fix_keyword, task_stage.keyword),
parser_enum.CPPCHECK: (fix_keyword, task_stage.cppcheck),
parser_enum.CPPLINT: (fix_keyword, task_stage.cpplint),
parser_enum.RESULT_DETAIL: (fix_result_detail, task_stage.result_detail),
parser_enum.DUMMY: (fix_dummy, task_stage.dummy),
parser_enum.RESULT_STATUS: (fix_dummy, task_stage.result_status),
parser_enum.FILE: (fix_file, task_stage.file),
ParserEnum.CLANG_TIDY: (fix_keyword, task_stage.clangtidy),
ParserEnum.KEYWORD: (fix_keyword, task_stage.keyword),
ParserEnum.CPPCHECK: (fix_keyword, task_stage.cppcheck),
ParserEnum.CPPLINT: (fix_keyword, task_stage.cpplint),
ParserEnum.RESULT_DETAIL: (fix_result_detail, task_stage.result_detail),
ParserEnum.DUMMY: (fix_dummy, task_stage.dummy),
ParserEnum.RESULT_STATUS: (fix_dummy, task_stage.result_status),
ParserEnum.FILE: (fix_file, task_stage.file),
}
return processed_dict
jon-lee marked this conversation as resolved Outdated
张泊明518370910136 commented 2025-03-03 11:25:43 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

not necessary

not necessary
李衍志523370910113 commented 2025-03-03 12:51:37 +08:00
Outdated
Review
Copy Link

resolved.

resolved.