-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 142
direct: simplify old state inference when no local diff exists #4485
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
pietern
wants to merge
2
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
direct-fix-infer-old-state
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+4
−8
Conversation
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
When there's a remote diff but no local diff for a field, it means oldState == newConfig for that field. We can therefore use ch.New (from newConfig) directly as the old state value, rather than attempting to fetch it from oldState with structaccess.Get. This simplifies the code and removes unnecessary error handling. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
denik
reviewed
Feb 10, 2026
| if err != nil && !errors.As(err, ¬Found) { | ||
| log.Debugf(ctx, "Constructing diff: accessing %q on %T: %s", ch.Path, oldState, err) | ||
| } | ||
| // We have a difference for remoteState but not for localState. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We don't know that, we can have a difference recorded at different levels.
For example, old->new diff for 'field' and new->remote diff for 'field.subfield'.
See also #4451
It looks like we make the same assumption below for Remote.
andrewnester
approved these changes
Feb 10, 2026
Collaborator
|
Commit: 61c309e
55 interesting tests: 33 FAIL, 7 KNOWN, 5 SKIP, 5 RECOVERED, 5 flaky
Top 50 slowest tests (at least 2 minutes):
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Changes
When there's a remote diff but no local diff for a field, it means
oldState == newConfigfor that field. Usech.Newdirectly instead of fetching fromoldStatewithstructaccess.Get().Tests
Existing tests pass.