fix content_is_equal #1410
fix content_is_equal #1410
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @normanrz, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request refines the Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request primarily fixes a bug in View.content_is_equal where the chunk_shape parameter was not correctly propagated, and enhances the method's robustness by performing comparisons on read-only views. Additionally, it refactors the View.chunk method to have a more intuitive default behavior for the read_only flag, improving code consistency. The changes are well-implemented and improve the codebase. I've included one suggestion to further enhance robustness in for_zipped_chunks by ensuring chunk shapes are always validated.
| source_chunk_shape = Vec3Int(source_chunk_shape) | ||
| target_chunk_shape = Vec3Int(target_chunk_shape) | ||
| self._check_chunk_shape(source_chunk_shape, read_only=True) | ||
| self._check_chunk_shape(source_chunk_shape, read_only=self.read_only) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Source chunks were always read-only previously. Not sure, that was necessary. I changed all usages of for_zipped_chunks to use explicit read_only source views.
☂️ Python Coverage
Overall Coverage
New FilesNo new covered files... Modified Files
|
Description:
chunk_shapetoView.content_is_equaland fixes the corresponding issuesTodos:
Make sure to delete unnecessary points or to check all before merging: