Skip to content

Table Overview: ignore Exception table #2087

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
TruongQuangSB wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Table Overview: ignore Exception table #2087

TruongQuangSB wants to merge 3 commits into from
+179 −111

Conversation

@TruongQuangSB
Copy link
Contributor

@TruongQuangSB TruongQuangSB commented Dec 15, 2025

No description provided.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 15, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Test Results

130 tests  ±0   130 ✅ ±0   20s ⏱️ -1s
 30 suites ±0     0 💤 ±0 
 30 files   ±0     0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit ce02561. ± Comparison against base commit 47cf100.

This pull request removes 9 and adds 9 tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both. 
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[1] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@68868328
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[2] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@544e8149
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[3] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@f6de586
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[4] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@7c847072
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[5] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@23f86d8a
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKey(TestData)[1] TestData [input=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Weichen_und_Gleissperren.impl.W_Kr_Gsp_ElementImpl@13390a96, expected=multi/container-id/element-id]
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKey(TestData)[2] TestData [input=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Signale.impl.SignalImpl@7497a554, expected=multi/456/123]
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKeyOther(TestData)[1] TestData [input=Pair [first=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Weichen_und_Gleissperren.impl.W_Kr_Gsp_ElementImpl@2fdf7da2, second=other], expected=multi/container-id/element-id/other=other]
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKeyOther(TestData)[2] TestData [input=Pair [first=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Signale.impl.SignalImpl@584136c1, second=xxx], expected=multi/456/123/other=xxx]

org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[1] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@38eb0f4d
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[2] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@74ea46e2
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[3] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@77bb48d5
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[4] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@12d5c30e
org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest ‑ testGetPathsDigraphPP(TestGetPathsDigraphPP)[5] org.eclipse.set.basis.graph.DigraphsTest$TestGetPathsDigraphPP@26586b74
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKey(TestData)[1] TestData [input=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Weichen_und_Gleissperren.impl.W_Kr_Gsp_ElementImpl@b2da3a5, expected=multi/container-id/element-id]
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKey(TestData)[2] TestData [input=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Signale.impl.SignalImpl@7a3a49e5, expected=multi/456/123]
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKeyOther(TestData)[1] TestData [input=Pair [first=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Weichen_und_Gleissperren.impl.W_Kr_Gsp_ElementImpl@4ac19bc6, second=other], expected=multi/container-id/element-id/other=other]
org.eclipse.set.ppmodel.extensions.utils.CacheUtilsTest ‑ testGetCacheKeyOther(TestData)[2] TestData [input=Pair [first=org.eclipse.set.model.planpro.Signale.impl.SignalImpl@4a7db5a, second=xxx], expected=multi/456/123/other=xxx]

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

mariusheine
mariusheine requested changes Dec 16, 2025
View reviewed changes
...ndles/org.eclipse.set.feature.table/src/org/eclipse/set/feature/table/messages/Messages.java Outdated
/**
* Nicht generierbar:
*/
public String TableOverviewPart_CantRendereTable;
Copy link
Contributor

@mariusheine mariusheine Dec 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@TruongQuangSB And rename it everywhere else 😅

Copy link
Contributor Author

@TruongQuangSB TruongQuangSB Dec 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok

@mariusheine
Copy link
Contributor

mariusheine commented Dec 16, 2025

@TruongQuangSB When I open a non transformable table before opening the table overview I still see that table in the "Nicht überprüft" category. But I think this is not easily solvable, isn't it? Everything is fine when I then click on "überprüfen".

If it is not easily solvable then we should keep it as it is.

@mariusheine mariusheine mentioned this pull request Dec 16, 2025
Open
@TruongQuangSB
Copy link
Contributor Author

TruongQuangSB commented Dec 16, 2025 •
edited
Loading

@TruongQuangSB When I open a non transformable table before opening the table overview I still see that table in the "Nicht überprüft" category. But I think this is not easily solvable, isn't it? Everything is fine when I then click on "überprüfen".

If it is not easily solvable then we should keep it as it is.

@mariusheine yeah, i have forgot this case. It is easily to solvable, the non rendere table will be added to nonTransformableTables . And it will be filtered by call avaiblesTable from TableOverviewPart at TableServiceImpl#getAvailableTables()

TruongQuangSB
TruongQuangSB commented Dec 16, 2025
View reviewed changes
...g.eclipse.set.feature.table/src/org/eclipse/set/feature/table/internal/TableServiceImpl.java
Comment on lines +731 to +740
final TableInfo tableInfo = modelServiceMap.keySet()
.stream()
.filter(info -> info.shortcut()
.equals(extractShortcut(elementId)))
.findFirst()
.orElse(null);
if (tableInfo != null) {
nonTransformableTables.add(tableInfo);
broker.post(Events.TABLEERROR_CHANGED, null);
}
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TruongQuangSB TruongQuangSB Dec 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no need to find tableInfo after #2078

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@mariusheine mariusheine Awaiting requested review from mariusheine

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@TruongQuangSB @mariusheine