GV

GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites

On this site

  • Sign in
  • ActionsCI/CD and automation
  • CodespacesCloud development environments
  • All Features
  • Documentation
  • Training
  • Certifications
  • Build with Copilot
  • Customize Copilot
  • Integrations
  • Trending repos
  • GitHub Sponsors
  • Developer articles
  • Enterprises

This view

  • Original page
  • New address

GeezerVison is showing github.com — Preserve whats_left scan coverage and reference errors by youknowone · Pull Request #9726 · RustPython/RustPython

Conversation

@youknowone

@youknowone youknowone commented Nov 5, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Split the non-raw reporting changes out of #9628 for separate review and merge. This PR does not collect or compare native __text_signature__ values, save JSON result files, or upload CI artifacts. Existing inspect.signature comparison and --json stdout mode remain.

  • Preserve reference inventory diagnostics, expanded/empty classes, class-selection decisions, and actual scan/import/parent observations.
  • Report CPython introspection failures as uncomparable rather than treating exceptions as reference signatures. Keep builtin/module name collisions from affecting classification.
  • Include failed reference imports and builtin signature inventory in the report, and reject a failed comparison subprocess.
  • Keep the 28 non-raw focused tests in scripts/tests/test_whatsleft.py.

Only the reporting script and its tests differ from main. The CI workflow is byte-identical to main. No runtime, Lib, generated report, new CI test step or parity gate is included. Existing reference discovery is retained.

Split and merge order

Merge this PR separately first. #9628 remains a draft dependent follow-up containing raw text-signature observation/comparison and optional result-file/CI-artifact persistence. Its prerequisite is this exact head. Do not merge #9628 as an alternative to this PR; after this merges, refresh its branch against main so only the follow-up remains.

Validation

Head: 116d1106a62, based on main 42d26965cf8f.

  • All 28 focused tests pass with CPython 3.15.0, also independently verified. The same tests previously passed reversed and three shuffled orders; removing persistence did not change them.
  • A complete CPython-only self-scan succeeds. JSON stdout equals the previously verified non-raw report exactly; only optional persistence was removed.
  • Independent review verifies the delta removes only --json-output, its file-write block, and CI sidecar/upload changes. All coverage, inventory and error-reporting behavior remains.
  • The 62 original non-raw assertions are preserved. Raw-only tests/assertions remain in Guard raw and inspected signature observations in CI #9628, whose full tree is byte-identical to the original combined tree.
  • Normal repository hooks and git diff --check pass.

These self-scans are not RustPython execution results. Local native RustPython, workspace/C API tests and Clippy were not run under the coordinated native-build reservation. Exact-head hosted CI is pending.

AI assistance

The split, tests and independent review were assisted by dot. The runtime does not expose an exact model version.

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

All reactions
@youknowdot
Preserve whats_left coverage and comparison evidence
6151ee5
Consolidate inventory diagnostics, scan coverage, reference introspection errors and JSON CI artifacts without native raw text-signature collection or comparison. Keep focused tests in one file.

Assisted-by: dot: model version unavailable
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Nov 5, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explain Change →

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

  • Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

Share

  • X
  • Mastodon
  • Reddit
  • LinkedIn
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

@youknowone youknowone mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2026
Guard raw and inspected signature observations in CI #9628
Draft
@youknowdot
Leave result persistence for the raw-signature follow-up
116d110
Keep the existing CI scan and JSON stdout mode unchanged. Move the optional JSON file output, environment sidecar and artifact upload into the separate follow-up.

Assisted-by: dot: model version unavailable
@youknowone youknowone changed the title Preserve whats_left scan coverage and comparison artifacts Preserve whats_left scan coverage and reference errors Nov 5, 2026
@youknowone
youknowone marked this pull request as ready for review November 5, 2026 15:51
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ⚠️ Failed 2026-11-05T15:51:47.780981Z
We couldn’t complete this review. Comment @codex review to try again.
116d110 Draft marked ready
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

@youknowone youknowone added the skip:ci Skip running the ci label Nov 5, 2026
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.

All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

@youknowone
youknowone merged commit 85036a4 into RustPython:main Nov 5, 2026
9 checks passed

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

skip:ci Skip running the ci

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

2 participants

@youknowone @youknowdot
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.
You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.