Skip to content

Rename the build record's fields and the code around them - #1277

Merged
jgabry merged 3 commits into
v1.0from
rename-record-fields
Sep 18, 2026
Merged

jgabry merged 3 commits into
v1.0from
rename-record-fields

Conversation

@jgabry

@jgabry jgabry commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Submission Checklist

  • Run unit tests
  • Declare copyright holder and agree to license (see below)

Summary

This PR and the summary below were assisted by AI. I have reviewed all code and doc.


Part of #1258. Nothing has shipped, so the names can still change; after 1.0 they cannot.

Record fields: request is now configuration, holding cpp_options, stanc_options, stanc_options_added, stanc_options_from_make, stanc_name and include_paths. artifact is executable_hash, builder is cmdstan, known_untracked_dependencies is untracked_dependencies, and the reason for a record that does not match its executable is executable_mismatch. The public result's provenance becomes record, still nested with status and reason.

Internals follow so the public result stays the record narrowed rather than translated: read_current_build() replaces observe_build(), assess_build() takes what is wanted and what is current, stancflags_added_by_make() replaces inherited_stancflags(), and the facts a model keeps about its executable come from facts_from_record(). Comments and test titles drop the design doc's vocabulary (guard, snapshot, unprovenanced, injected, inherited) where it named these things. The design doc changes only where it names a field; the contract is regenerated.

Targeted test files run locally: test-build-record, test-build-assess, test-build-record-compile, test-model-guard, test-model-rebuild-rules, test-model-rebuild, test-cpp_opts, test-utils, test-model-compile, all passing.

Copyright and Licensing

Please list the copyright holder for the work you are submitting
(this will be you or your assignee, such as a university or company):
Jonah Gabry

By submitting this pull request, the copyright holder is agreeing to
license the submitted work under the following licenses:

Nothing has shipped, so the names can still change. The record's
`request` is now `configuration`, with `cpp_options`, `stanc_options`,
`stanc_options_added` and `stanc_options_from_make` inside it, since
cmdstanr injects nothing into `cpp_options` and the plain names mean what
the arguments mean. `artifact` is `executable_hash`, `builder` is
`cmdstan`, `known_untracked_dependencies` is `untracked_dependencies`,
and the reason for a record that does not match its executable is
`executable_mismatch`. The public result's `provenance` becomes `record`.

The code follows: `read_current_build()` replaces `observe_build()`,
`assess_build()` takes what is wanted and what is current,
`stancflags_added_by_make()` replaces `inherited_stancflags()`, and the
facts a model keeps about its executable come from `facts_from_record()`.
Comments and test titles drop the design doc's vocabulary where it named
these things.

Part of #1258.
Nothing has shipped, so the names can still change. The record's
`request` is now `configuration`, with `cpp_options`, `stanc_options`,
`stanc_options_added` and `stanc_options_from_make` inside it, since
cmdstanr injects nothing into `cpp_options` and the plain names mean what
the arguments mean. `artifact` is `executable_hash`, `builder` is
`cmdstan`, `known_untracked_dependencies` is `untracked_dependencies`,
and the reason for a record that does not match its executable is
`executable_mismatch`. The public result's `provenance` becomes `record`.

The code follows: `read_current_build()` replaces `observe_build()`,
`assess_build()` takes what is wanted and what is current,
`stancflags_added_by_make()` replaces `inherited_stancflags()`, and the
facts a model keeps about its executable come from `facts_from_record()`.
Comments and test titles drop the design doc's vocabulary where it named
these things.

Part of #1258.
@codecov-commenter

codecov-commenter commented Sep 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (v1.0@99b997d). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             v1.0    #1277   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   93.25%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       17           
  Lines           ?     7068           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?     6591           
  Misses          ?      477           
  Partials        ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@jgabry
jgabry marked this pull request as ready for review September 18, 2026 16:26
@jgabry
jgabry merged commit cda4315 into v1.0 Sep 18, 2026
15 checks passed
@jgabry
jgabry deleted the rename-record-fields branch September 18, 2026 16:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants