Forward destination_data_layer in graph_proxy::unfold#401
Open
olantwin wants to merge 3 commits intoFramework-R-D:mainfrom
Open
Forward destination_data_layer in graph_proxy::unfold#401olantwin wants to merge 3 commits intoFramework-R-D:mainfrom
olantwin wants to merge 3 commits intoFramework-R-D:mainfrom
Conversation
greenc-FNAL
requested review from
aolivier23,
greenc-FNAL,
knoepfel,
marcpaterno and
sabasehrish
as code owners
graph_proxy::unfold was missing the destination_data_layer parameter and used create_glue(false) which produces glue<void_tag> instead of glue<Splitter>. This meant algorithm authors could not specify the child layer for unfold, and the Splitter template was not forwarded correctly to glue::unfold. This commit forwards the parameter and construct glue<Splitter> directly, matching what framework_graph already does.
Contributor
|
Review the full CodeQL report for details. |
knoepfel
force-pushed
the
fix/graph-proxy-unfold-destination-layer
branch
from
1ddb400 to
51fa5fe
Compare
knoepfel
reviewed
Mar 19, 2026
phlex/core/graph_proxy.hpp
Outdated
| auto unf, | ||
| concurrency c = concurrency::serial) | ||
| concurrency c = concurrency::serial, | ||
| std::string destination_data_layer = "") |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch, @olantwin! I think we want destination_data_layer to not have a default. So can you swap the order of concurrency c and std::string destination_data_layer and remove the latter's default?
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #401 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.43% 84.31% -0.13%
==========================================
Files 127 127
Lines 3329 3329
Branches 564 564
==========================================
- Hits 2811 2807 -4
- Misses 325 326 +1
- Partials 193 196 +3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Playing around with different data layers I noticed that it wasn't possible to specify the destination layer for an unfold. This PR attempts to fill this gap.
Comments very welcome, as I'm just starting with Phlex it's possible or even likely that I overlooked a better way to do this.
With the PR code, a registration like follows becomes possible:
m.unfold<tw::ClusterSplitter>( "find_candidates", &tw::ClusterSplitter::has_more, [](tw::ClusterSplitter const& splitter, std::size_t index) { return splitter.emit(index); }, concurrency::unlimited, "event_candidate") .input_family(product_query{ .creator = "merge_window", .layer = "time_window", .suffix = "tw_data"}) .experimental_when("tw_module:trigger") .output_products("candidate");All the best,
Oliver