Define a IM/DM decoupling interface for interaction model engine to interact with the data model bits #32914
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
…er validate that we get events emitted
- Remove unneeded includes from this header - add dependency to core (due to TLV)
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
andyg-apple,
anush-apple,
arkq,
bzbarsky-apple,
carol-apple,
cecille,
chrisdecenzo and
chshu
|
PR #32914: Size comparison from c4699cf to e6cdc3e Increases (3 builds for cc32xx, mbed)
Decreases (1 build for stm32)
Full report (4 builds for cc32xx, mbed, stm32)
|
|
PR #32914: Size comparison from c4699cf to e4b0010 Increases above 0.2%:
Increases (46 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, psoc6, telink)
Decreases (44 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, efr32, linux, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
Full report (71 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
|
tehampson
reviewed
Apr 25, 2024
Co-authored-by: Terence Hampson <thampson@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Terence Hampson <thampson@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Terence Hampson <thampson@google.com>
Co-authored-by: Terence Hampson <thampson@google.com>
|
PR #32914: Size comparison from c4699cf to 5f76b9c Increases above 0.2%:
Increases (46 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, psoc6, telink)
Decreases (44 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, efr32, linux, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
Full report (71 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
|
tehampson
reviewed
Apr 25, 2024
tehampson
approved these changes
Apr 25, 2024
|
PR #32914: Size comparison from c4699cf to d134fab Increases above 0.2%:
Increases (44 builds for bl602, bl702, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, psoc6, telink)
Decreases (54 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, efr32, linux, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
Full report (71 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, linux, mbed, nrfconnect, nxp, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
|
chrisdecenzo
approved these changes
May 7, 2024
| namespace InteractionModel { | ||
|
|
||
| /// Data provided to data models in order to interface with the interaction model environment. | ||
| struct InteractionModelActions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here's a problem: "Action" in the context of the interaction model has a specific meaning, and this struct has absolutely nothing to do with that meaning.
I can't tell by looking at this struct name, or the struct definition, what is supposed to go into here and why it has, say, Events but not Attributes or Commands. And I have no idea what Paths is supposed to be. If it's "things you can do with paths", that seems like the wrong level of abstraction to me.
This is really "InteractionModelAPIs" or something. But then broken down into separate structs for separate types of APIs... (more on this below).
Realistically, this should perhaps have been called chip::app::InteractionModel (as a class, not a namespace), but if we are using that name for the namespace.... chip::app::InteractionModel::Instance? chip::app::InteractionModel::Callbacks? Something else? I am struggling to find a sensible name here.
| namespace app { | ||
| namespace InteractionModel { | ||
|
|
||
| /// Handles path attributes for interaction models. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What are "path attributes"?
Was this supposed to be "attribute paths"? But if so, the generic "Paths" naming is really odd.
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.
This starts implementing based on the proposal in https://hackmd.io/@6NmxK83qTm2u-ya_60bJEg/S1swIFbxR
There is little implementation, mostly headers and virtual interface declarations.
The intent is to have changes reasonably small for review purposes rather than attempting one large PR at some future point in time. The downside on this is that we may find some things that don't map well and may need moving around as this is developed (especially command handling with batch support seems to potentially be complex).
Changes
app/interaction-model(because data-model was taken)