fabi/Sylpheed
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 9 Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

port: name the RECORD, not just the element -- alpha 80 IS declared

Browse Source 
The Decoder challenged my audit: ptbtn00f's peak alpha of 80 is 'not declared
anywhere', because ptbtn00.rat's leaf declares ptbtn00.t32 at a flat 0:255.

Refuted from this export, and they can check it on the disc. The pulse is a
DIFFERENT record. ptbtn00 carries two:
  leaf  record=ptbtn00.rat  loop=120  ptbtn00.t32   kf 0:255           (theirs)
  focus record=ptbtn00f.rat loop=120  ptbtn00f.t32  kf 0:0 6:6 29:74
                                        35:80 50:80 58:74 97:6 105:0   (the pulse)
Peak 80, eight keyframes, reached through focus_link. So the amplitude is
declared, not capture-only, and their 🟡 about the 120-unit loop 'belonging to
ptbtn00.rat with no ptbtn00f in it' resolves too: ptbtn00f.rat is its own record
with its own 120-unit loop.

Their question of whether my check skipped the value or silently passed it: it
did neither. check-authored-vs-declared covers looping_focus_records' record
element and period only; alpha 80 is not authored anywhere in the port, so there
was nothing for it to pass or skip. The manual audit checked it against the focus
record and read it correctly.

The real defect was mine and it was a WORDING one: saying 'declared' without
saying in WHICH record. The check now prints the record it compared against.
This commit is contained in:
Sylpheed port agent
2026-09-03 20:29:55 +00:00
parent e9a57e2167
commit b24e1a681a
1 changed files with 12 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

14
tools/port/check-authored-vs-declared
View File

@@ -22,6 +22,15 @@ because it fails silently in both directions:
Both look like nothing. Neither is caught by `audit-kinds`, which checks that a Both look like nothing. Neither is caught by `audit-kinds`, which checks that a
`why` cites something, not that the number still agrees with the disc. `why` cites something, not that the number still agrees with the disc.
⚠️ NAME THE RECORD, NOT JUST THE ELEMENT. An audit of these values was read by
the other agent as covering `ptbtn00f`'s peak alpha, and they reported it
undeclared -- because they looked at `ptbtn00.rat`'s LEAF, which declares
`ptbtn00.t32` at a flat `0:255`. The pulse is in a DIFFERENT record,
`ptbtn00f.rat`, reached through `focus_link`, and it declares
`0:0 6:6 29:74 35:80 50:80 58:74 97:6 105:0`. Both records carry a 120-unit
loop. Saying "declared" without saying *in which record* cost a round trip, so
this prints the record it compared against.
⚠️ SCOPE, deliberately narrow. Only values with a declared counterpart are ⚠️ SCOPE, deliberately narrow. Only values with a declared counterpart are
checkable here. A measured constant with no disc equivalent -- the leaf rate checkable here. A measured constant with no disc equivalent -- the leaf rate
itself, for instance -- cannot be verified this way and is not pretended to be. itself, for instance -- cannot be verified this way and is not pretended to be.
@@ -55,9 +64,10 @@ def checks():
continue continue
focus = el.get("focus", {}) focus = el.get("focus", {})
got = [f["id"] for f in focus.get("elements", [])] got = [f["id"] for f in focus.get("elements", [])]
out.append((f"{key} record_element", cfg.get("record_element"), rec = focus.get("record", "?")
out.append((f"{key} record_element [{rec}]", cfg.get("record_element"),
got[0] if got else None)) got[0] if got else None))
out.append((f"{key} period_units", float(cfg.get("period_units", -1)), out.append((f"{key} period_units [{rec}]", float(cfg.get("period_units", -1)),
float(focus.get("loop_length_units", -1)))) float(focus.get("loop_length_units", -1))))
return out return out