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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Handle runtime table gaps on code block deletion #10605
Handle runtime table gaps on code block deletion #10605
Changes from 1 commit
baed834
85f7232
c3bd236
87b0284
7a45ab7
f6343bd
e331114
84b701b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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 guess I had similar question here why we are checking children of last block but other than this, everything else looks fine to me..
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 logged a ticket for the undo/redo bug. Maybe we can revisit this after we have fixed that? I feel they may be related.
I could also place a comment here mentioning that.
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.
Thanks, would be good if you do that
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.
If the assertion that the last codeblock always has the largest id is true, then this function needs to be recursive.
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 have wondered about that too, but if you take a look at the part of the code I mention here #10605 (comment), you'll see that the code doesn't do recursion, it also looks only at the first level of children. Maybe these code blocks can contain only one level of children in practice?
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
BfsBuildSequenceTable
method is recursive.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.
@aparajit-pratap Yes, but it's using
CodeBlockList
which is actually a tree. Both this method and the one I pointed to in my previous comment useCompleteCodeBlockList
which contains the same nodes but is flattened, to one level of children it would seem.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.
There should be a codeblock for each new block (language block such as
[Imperative {...}]
,if-else
,while
,for
blocks etc., and function definition) so there can be any number of nesting or children of child codeblocks and so on.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.
Then how can it be that the children can have the largest id? The largest should always be at the top level, i.e.
CompleteCodeBlockList
?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 don't know if I understood what you meant. What I was saying is that the
List.Add
method adds to the end of the list, and since we always get a bigger id each time, by construction the biggest id should be at the end of the flattened list. Does that make sense?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.
Yes, I understood that. If we're adding to the end of the
CompleteCodeBlockList
, we simply need to check the size of that list or thecodeBlockId
of the last item inCompleteCodeBlockList
. Why are you checking for children of the last item in theCompleteCodeBlockList
?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.
If we go back to the purpose of this PR, those two do not always match, so it's not the same to go with one or the other. Just wanted to make that clear.
By way of undo/redo in Josh's graph I was able to see a crash where the last code block contained children with larger ids than the id of its parent or the amount of elements in the list. It does seem strange that the children themselves were not part of the list, so it could be a byproduct of the undo/redo bug.
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 so sure I understand the changes, to be honest. If you feel confident you are welcome to get this approved by someone else on the team. I'll do some investigation on my own to try to convince myself of your changes :)