refactor(api): remove legacy from names of variables and classes that are not actually legacy #15075
+187
−232
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
jbleon95
requested review from
SyntaxColoring,
TamarZanzouri,
sanni-t and
CaseyBatten
sanni-t
reviewed
May 2, 2024
Comment on lines
20
to
23
| LoadInfo, | ||
| LabwareLoadInfo, | ||
| InstrumentLoadInfo, | ||
| ModuleLoadInfo, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do prefer these to be aliased as LegacyLoadInfo, etc because they actually are classes from/for the legacy system.
| @@ -63,24 +44,24 @@ | |||
| LEGACY_JSON_SCHEMA_VERSION_CUTOFF = 6 | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| class LegacyFileReader: | |||
| class PythonProtocolFileReader: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about PythonAndLegacyFileReader to be consistent with the PythonAndLegacyRunner, and also since it actually does include the legacy JSON protocol files.
| @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ def _handle_legacy_command(self, command: LegacyCommand) -> None: | |||
| pe_actions = self._legacy_command_mapper.map_command(command=command) | |||
| self._actions_to_dispatch.put(pe_actions) | |||
|
|
|||
| def _handle_equipment_loaded(self, load_info: LegacyLoadInfo) -> None: | |||
| def _handle_equipment_loaded(self, load_info: LoadInfo) -> None: | |||
| """Handle an equipment load reported by the APIv2 protocol. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we can update these docstrings to be clearer too.
Suggested change
| """Handle an equipment load reported by the APIv2 protocol. | |
| """Handle an equipment load reported by the legacy APIv2 protocol. |
Carlos-fernandez
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 20, 2024
… are not actually legacy (#15075)
Carlos-fernandez
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 3, 2024
… are not actually legacy (#15075)
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.
Overview
Sometime ago, a number of classes in our
protocol_runnerfolder were marked as legacy with the thought that we'd move to a new major API version and those would no longer be the actively developed parts of our protocol reading and execution.However this proved not to be the cases, and for the past couple years these have continued to be marked as legacy despite the fact that they are being actively used now and for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, there are a number of folders, classes and variables that are marked legacy which are actually legacy parts of our system, further increasing confusion of what is current and what is deprecated/no longer in active development.
This PR renames everything in the
protocol_runnerthat was prematurely marked as legacy, and additionally gets rid of a bunch of re-exports that were further naming things that are no longer legacy.Test Plan
Pure refactor PR, so existing unit and integration tests cover everything.
Changelog
legacy_wrappers.pytopython_protocol_wrappers.py,LegacyFileReadertoPythonProtocolFileReader,LegacyContextCreatortoProtocolContextCreator, andLegacyExecutortoPythonProtocolExecutorReview requests
Is there anything I either missed or incorrectly labelled as no longer legacy but which in fact is. I also removed the export renaming of
LoadInfosince the fact that it's legacy is shown by the fact its in the correctly namedlegacyfolder ofprotocol_api, but if this is a step too far I can revert those changes.Risk assessment
Low, refactor only PR.