Skip to content

Packages IO4 #44

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

Merged
merged 41 commits into from
Aug 25, 2022
Merged

Packages IO4 #44

merged 41 commits into from
Aug 25, 2022

Conversation

mbaluda
Copy link
Contributor

@mbaluda mbaluda commented Aug 5, 2022

Description

Rule package IO4

Change request type

  • Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
  • Internal documentation
  • External documentation
  • Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
  • External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

  • No rules added
  • Queries have been added for the following rules:
    • FIO45-C
    • FIO47-C
  • Queries have been modified for the following rules:
    • rule number here

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

  • The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
  • The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
  • The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

  • Yes
  • No

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

  • Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

@mbaluda mbaluda self-assigned this Aug 5, 2022
@mbaluda mbaluda requested a review from knewbury01 August 10, 2022 17:49
@mbaluda mbaluda changed the title Package IO4 Packages Contracts1 and IO4 Aug 11, 2022
@mbaluda mbaluda marked this pull request as ready for review August 11, 2022 17:49
@mbaluda
Copy link
Contributor Author

mbaluda commented Aug 15, 2022

The remaining FP/FN will be fixed with this issue in the standard cpp library

Copy link
Contributor

@knewbury01 knewbury01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

FIO47-C looking good :) just a few little suggestions here and there,
will continue the pkg review in a second iteration.

Copy link
Contributor

@knewbury01 knewbury01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

initial review of FIO45-C

@mbaluda mbaluda requested a review from knewbury01 August 25, 2022 01:04
Copy link
Contributor

@knewbury01 knewbury01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice work on implementing the rules and addressing all the comments,

LGTM!

@mbaluda mbaluda merged commit e451f27 into github:main Aug 25, 2022
@mbaluda mbaluda deleted the mbaluda/IO4 branch August 25, 2022 20:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants