Skip to content

JCF: DUNE-DAQ/daqdataformats#79: replace daqdataformats::TriggerRecor…#488

Merged
jcfreeman2 merged 1 commit intodevelopfrom
johnfreeman/daqdataformats_issue79_code_refactoring
Apr 21, 2026
Merged

JCF: DUNE-DAQ/daqdataformats#79: replace daqdataformats::TriggerRecor…#488
jcfreeman2 merged 1 commit intodevelopfrom
johnfreeman/daqdataformats_issue79_code_refactoring

Conversation

@jcfreeman2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@jcfreeman2 jcfreeman2 commented Apr 15, 2026

…dHeader::operator[] with daqdataformats::TriggerRecordHeader::at, which performs the identical function and hasn't been removed from the code

Description

In TRBModule a call to daqdataformats::ComponentRequest::operator[] is replaced with a call to daqdataformats::ComponentRequest::at as the former has been removed for reasons described in DUNE-DAQ/daqdataformats#81. Note at does exactly the same thing operator[] did.

To test the changes, make sure the code still builds, alongside daqdataformats and dfmessages checked out to the branches of the same name, johnfreeman/daqdataformats_issue79_code_refactoring. Also confirm for yourself by looking at daqdataformats::ComponentRequest::at that it does the same thing daqdataformats::ComponentRequest::operator[] did.

Type of change

  • Documentation (non-breaking change that adds or improves the documentation)
  • New feature or enhancement (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Optimization (non-breaking change that improves code/performance)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • Breaking change (whatever its nature)

I suppose this is an optimization in the sense that dfmodules won't build unless this is merged once DUNE-DAQ/daqdataformats#81 is merged into daqdataformats.

Testing checklist

  • Unit tests pass (e.g. dbt-build --unittest)
  • Minimal system quicktest passes (pytest -s minimal_system_quick_test.py)
  • Full set of integration tests pass (dunedaq_integtest_bundle.sh)
  • Python tests pass if applicable (e.g. python -m pytest)
  • Pre-commit hooks run successfully if applicable (e.g. pre-commit run --all-files)

Comments here on the testing

Further checks

  • Code is commented where needed, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • Code style is correct (dbt-build --lint, and/or see https://dune-daq-sw.readthedocs.io/en/latest/packages/styleguide/)
  • If applicable, new tests have been added or an issue has been opened to tackle that in the future.
    (Indicate issue here: # (issue))

…dHeader::operator[] with daqdataformats::TriggerRecordHeader::at, which performs the identical function and hasn't been removed from the code
@jcfreeman2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Closing this as I'm reconsidering the removal of daqdataformats::ComponentRequest::operator[]

@jcfreeman2 jcfreeman2 closed this Apr 16, 2026
@jcfreeman2 jcfreeman2 reopened this Apr 17, 2026
@jcfreeman2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

jcfreeman2 commented Apr 17, 2026

Reopening (although still in Draft form) in light of daqdataformats commit 45a02b2c8748 in DUNE-DAQ/daqdataformats#81

@jcfreeman2
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

jcfreeman2 commented Apr 20, 2026

n.b. The reason the single-repo CI workflow is in error is due to a bug in the workflow itself, and not through the fault of the code in this PR (it's inappropriately complaining about linting problems with dfmessages, a problem which got fixed after this PR was opened in DUNE-DAQ/.github#18).

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@eflumerf eflumerf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See comment in github.com/DUNE-DAQ/daqdataformats/pull/81

@eflumerf eflumerf marked this pull request as ready for review April 21, 2026 15:13
@jcfreeman2 jcfreeman2 merged commit 86941b8 into develop Apr 21, 2026
7 of 9 checks passed
@jcfreeman2 jcfreeman2 deleted the johnfreeman/daqdataformats_issue79_code_refactoring branch April 21, 2026 15:44
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.

3 participants