ADR-05 test execution#18
Conversation
| ## React (Generate) | ||
|
|
||
| From `React` component it needs one function provided via an agreed upon entry point: | ||
| - `get_trace_reactor(trace, reactor = None)` provides the reactor for the given trace, and checks that they match each other. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd like to clarify this part: isn't the return value of this function a path to the reactor file (this, at least, makes the most sense to me). In that case, giving a reactor value as an argument doesn't make sense.
I'd like to suggest that we explicitly ask for checking a reactor by invoking check_reactor function and that the execute module reads from the conf file about the default reactor path if needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good point! the formulation is not precise enough, let me refine it... Better like that?
get_trace_reactor(trace, reactor = None)takes the optional path to the reactor as argument, and returns the path to the reactor file if it matches the provided trace, or raises an exception if it doesn't. Ifreactorargument is omitted, the default reactor should be used.
| - `get_trace(trace = None)` retrieves the ITF trace, either the default one, or from the provided location; | ||
| - `get_model_trace(model = None, config = None, sample = None)` provides a trace from the model, using either default, or the provided parameters. | ||
|
|
||
| ## React (Generate) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
React calls different associations than Reactor (I would guess most people would connect it somehow to reactive programming. I suggest the name ReactorRoom (as in my PR) or to settle on plain Generate
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, you are right; I forgot about that other React...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In fact, I like the name Reactor. Short and clear enough. I just caught myself at calling your component that way in my mind:)
2 participants
Closes #13.
The rendered document.