-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
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
Parse Java docs to pull useful information from mission model #1055
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
cohansen
force-pushed
the
prototype/parse-javadoc
branch
from
August 2, 2023 17:24
1018777
to
1182346
Compare
cohansen
force-pushed
the
prototype/parse-javadoc
branch
from
August 2, 2023 18:05
2a519c6
to
40326d5
Compare
camargo
changed the title
Prototype/parse javadoc
Parse Java docs to pull useful information from mission model
Aug 2, 2023
cohansen
force-pushed
the
prototype/parse-javadoc
branch
from
August 3, 2023 15:20
40326d5
to
05d8ad5
Compare
cohansen
force-pushed
the
prototype/parse-javadoc
branch
from
August 4, 2023 17:04
05d8ad5
to
03cf6eb
Compare
…d regex compile into outer loop
… resource_type.units col
sequencing server
cohansen
force-pushed
the
prototype/parse-javadoc
branch
from
September 5, 2023 16:22
760ce50
to
153f38a
Compare
Mythicaeda
reviewed
Sep 5, 2023
Comment on lines
+202
to
+203
console.log(activitySchema); | ||
|
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.
Minor: console.log
needs to be removed
Mythicaeda
reviewed
Sep 5, 2023
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.
Doesn't this file need to be modifying the entries in these columns, as the entries have additional keys?
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.
Description
This PR works off @mattdailis's prototype javadoc parsing code. I added a
JavadocParser
class that handles specific parsing for@aerie.unit
,@aerie.computedAttribute
, and@aerie.resourceName
.@param
tag followed by a@aerie.unit
tag on a new line. Example@param
tag. Example@MissionModel
in 2 different spots as well, they are annotated with a@aerie.resourceName
followed by a@aerie.unit
tag on a new line:MissionModel
class itself. ExampleMissionModel
. Example@aerie.computedAttribute
, which must be annotated on aRecord
type returned from the@EffectModel
. ExampleOne thing to discuss as part of this PR is if we should prefix all of our custom tags with@Aerie
or something similar. This would be more verbose but would avoid any conflicts if we pull in a library that uses the same tags as we do or they become official tags as part of the Javadoc spec.This PR introduces breaking changes for the UI because we have renamed the following fields:
activity_type.parameters
->activity_type.parameter_definitions
activity_type.computed_attributes_value_schema
->activity_type.computed_attribute_definitions
mission_model_parameters.parameters
->mission_model_parameters.parameter_definitions
resource_type.schema
->resource_type.definition
Verification
Tests were added for some of the parsing, these could be improved as right now we don't have coverage for resource types and computed attributes. If the best place to add this is inside of
FooMissionModel
, I can do that as part of this PR.Documentation
NASA-AMMOS/aerie-docs#71
Future work
More javadoc tag parsing, up next is
@subsystem
and@color
(#934) which will change some of this code.