-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 45
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
core: remove the middle green signals in the STD #9906
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
97bdd73
to
62a8094
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #9906 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 38.20% 38.17% -0.03%
==========================================
Files 998 998
Lines 92193 92197 +4
Branches 1192 1192
==========================================
- Hits 35220 35200 -20
- Misses 56517 56541 +24
Partials 456 456
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
(completed the main description)
It doesn't work from my test.
Maybe be should also shorten the first free block? 🤔
Signed-off-by: Younes Khoudli <[email protected]>
62a8094
to
d3dbf31
Compare
Signed-off-by: Younes Khoudli <[email protected]>
d3dbf31
to
1d3b9f7
Compare
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'm not sure I understand what you did on the SignalProjectionEndpoint (v1): why can't we completely remove it?
If we keep it like this, we probably need a clear todo
to accelerate future cleanup work.
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.
Shouldn't we put it in a kt dir?
Or should we just not care and add a deprecated
comment right away?
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.
The kotlin directory is not necessary anymore since at least Kotlin 1.0. I believe we should probably just merge the kotlin and java dirs
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.
Hmm. Personal opinion: I'd rather not merge the directories, since the end goal is probably just to have the whole thing in kotlin, it makes a clear distinction between what we have to keep and what we have to migrate.
For that reason as well, as long as we separate them, I'd rather have the kotlin files in the kotlin directory (especially since it already exists).
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'd rather not merge the directories, since the end goal is probably just to have the whole thing in kotlin, it makes a clear distinction between what we have to keep and what we have to migrate.
I really don't get that. If it's about the kotlin/java migration, just find -name '*.java'
?
If it's about the obsolete v1 APIs, this is an obsolete v1 api file :p
core/src/main/kotlin/fr/sncf/osrd/signal_projection/SignalProjectionV2.kt
Show resolved
Hide resolved
This is working now (even though there are other questions).
We're keeping the TSv1 endpoints for a few more months (I believe until some time in January). But there is not reason to keep the old logic if we can avoid 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.
This looks like it's working as intended.
Give me your opinion on the kotlin/java module question.
I'd love a unit test on this case as well.
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.
Hmm. Personal opinion: I'd rather not merge the directories, since the end goal is probably just to have the whole thing in kotlin, it makes a clear distinction between what we have to keep and what we have to migrate.
For that reason as well, as long as we separate them, I'd rather have the kotlin files in the kotlin directory (especially since it already exists).
Currently, VL (green) blocks only have a meaning before the train, and the meaning is "I require this signal to be open to keep to my schedule".
After/during the train, the meaning would be "I don't constrain this signal" which is actually what blank means. So let's keep those cases blank.
Case appears when diverging from the projected path, stopping on closed signal, then converging (stop in the same station, but different track)
Before:
After this PR:
Relates to 1 part of https://github.com/osrd-project/osrd-confidential/issues/886