Skip to content

docs(protocols): fourth whole-repo pass over application, misc and the protocol base (#1103) - #1909

Open
JarryShaw wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/1103d-application
Open

JarryShaw wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/1103d-application

Conversation

@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Please follow the guide below

What is the purpose of your pull request?

Tick the commit type your subject line carries.

  • fix — corrects a defect
  • feat — adds a feature
  • perf — changes performance, not behaviour
  • refactor — changes neither behaviour nor performance
  • test — tests only
  • docs — documentation only
  • ci — workflows or build tooling
  • release — bumps the version or rolls up a distribution
  • chore — anything else

The fourth whole-repo prose pass of #1103, over the application and misc protocols and the protocol base. It changes prose only: every changed .py file's AST is unchanged once string expressions are blanked, except where a docstring is added or vendor template text is edited together with its generated const file.

Accuracy:

  • PCAP-NG registry comments describe what a value is: a str naming the
    read/make methods, falling back to the *_unknown pair, or a
    (parser, constructor) pair; they claimed a single parsing method.
  • _EnumRegistry.missing gets its own docstring; it rendered the
    inherited defaultdict pseudo-code, which describes inserting a miss.

Wording:

  • "c.f." becomes "see" (or "compare" where a comparison is meant), and
    "&" becomes "and", in the next-layer registry comments.
  • Module docstrings and their pages read "implements an extractor for".
  • Raw.post_init and a PCAP-NG schema docstring lose garbled clauses.

Counts:

  • A comment in ProtocolBase._make_index no longer counts lines.

Refs #1103

…e protocol base (#1103)

Accuracy:
- PCAP-NG registry comments describe what a value is: a str naming the
  _read_*/_make_* methods, falling back to the *_unknown pair, or a
  (parser, constructor) pair; they claimed a single parsing method.
- _EnumRegistry.__missing__ gets its own docstring; it rendered the
  inherited defaultdict pseudo-code, which describes inserting a miss.

Wording:
- "c.f." becomes "see" (or "compare" where a comparison is meant), and
  "&" becomes "and", in the next-layer registry comments.
- Module docstrings and their pages read "implements an extractor for".
- Raw.__post_init__ and a PCAP-NG schema docstring lose garbled clauses.

Counts:
- A comment in ProtocolBase._make_index no longer counts lines.

Refs #1103
@JarryShaw JarryShaw added docs Pull requests that change documentation only (docs: subject prefix) review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 19, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw moved this to In review in PyPCAPKit Oct 19, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

GOOD TO GO at 4ecbdc432. A Sonnet cross-review found no accuracy, count, timed-context or markup problems. The AST guard shows prose-only changes, and tests/project, the tier guard and the docstring contract pass.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate and removed review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 19, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Coverage: 90.07% (unit tier, Python 3.15, 4ecbdc432, Unit Tests run success)

Package Statements Missed Branches Partial Cover
pcapkit (top level) 104 2 20 2 96.77%
pcapkit/const 19595 881 2618 867 92.11%
pcapkit/corekit 2504 70 792 36 96.54%
pcapkit/dumpkit 276 3 100 3 98.40%
pcapkit/foundation 2916 164 1016 34 93.59%
pcapkit/interface 138 7 52 5 93.68%
pcapkit/protocols 17411 224 4580 189 98.10%
pcapkit/toolkit 872 177 298 8 77.18%
pcapkit/utilities 522 2 158 4 99.12%
pcapkit/vendor 4431 2341 1018 156 43.64%

Per-file detail: the coverage-html artifact of this run.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

docs Pull requests that change documentation only (docs: subject prefix) review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate

Projects

Status: In review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant