-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 68
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
Update platform description to new format #567
Update platform description to new format #567
Conversation
Update the section describing the `platform` class to the new format.
|
||
_Effects:_ The [code]#selector# is called once for every <<root-device>> as |
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.
Remove the once
? Who knows, maybe some implementation wants to do two passes on the list of rood devices?
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 did this in 1b1bde4 because I agree that this section does not currently say that the selector is called exactly once for each device.
However, I wonder if this is an oversight in the spec. Why wouldn't we want to guarantee that it is called exactly once for each root device? This could make a difference for a selector that maintains internal state across each call.
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 agree, but that seems more than editorial as, in theory, it may impact a state-full selector, as you said.
I don't have a strong opinion about this one, but I lean toward adding once
:)
It doesn't seem like a big ask for an implementer to call their selector only once per device, and indeed, it may simplify the user's implementation of a selector
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.
FWIW, I think these "new format" PRs will be more than pure editorial, so it should be OK to make some small improvements. I don't mind making this as a separate PR, though, if you prefer.
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.
Maybe a new PR would give others an opportunity to chime in, and we could merge this PR without waiting for the "once" resolution.
Minimal nitpicking questions |
Use the same formal parameter name `type` for all the `get_devices` member functions.
The description of device selectors in the "Device selection" section does not say that a selector is called exactly once for each root device. Change the wording of the `platform` selector constructor to be consistent with this wording, leaving the number of times it is called ambiguous. We might want to reconsider this, though. Why wouldn't we want to require the selector to be called exactly once?
Discussion on calling selector more than once - likely in some implementations. Open PR to discuss. |
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.
LGTM in general, and I like the new style. Two nitpicks about adding hyperlinks for user-friendliness, and one wording change we should think about to make sure we're happy it's equivalent.
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.
That looks good!
Restore the wording that `get_platforms` returns "available" platforms.
Add a link from `platform::get_info` to the section defining the platform information descriptors.
@psalz: Do you know why this is getting a failure in "Open CTS issue for spec changes / create-issue"? It seems like there are two questions:
|
Addressed in #597.
|
WG approves to merge after rev 9 release. |
Rev 9 was released, so merging. |
Update platform description to new format
Update platform description to new format (cherry picked from commit 6652116)
Update platform description to new format (cherry picked from commit 6652116)
Update the section describing the
platform
class to the new format.