Skip to content

ci(experimental): count raised MemoryErrors, not mentions of one (#1962) - #1972

Merged
JarryShaw merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/1962-memoryerror-count
Oct 20, 2026
Merged

JarryShaw merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
ci/1962-memoryerror-count

Conversation

@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

What is the purpose of your pull request?

  • ci — workflows or build tooling

Description of your pull request and other information

The GraalPy leg warned tests raised MemoryError whenever grep -cw MemoryError found a match. That grep also matched a test docstring printed inside a traceback, so every timed-out run warned of a MemoryError that was never raised (#1962).

Closes #1962

- Run unit tests: count the lines that MemoryError heads, at the line's
  start or after pytest's E, an INTERNALERROR> or an exception group's |,
  instead of every word match, which counted a test docstring a traceback
  printed and warned of a MemoryError on every GraalPy timeout.
- Pin it: a docstring, source line or Java OutOfMemoryError mention is not
  counted; a raised MemoryError, #1753's included, is.
- Say so in the step's comment and the workflows page.

Closes #1962
@JarryShaw JarryShaw added ci Pull requests that change CI or workflow configuration (ci: subject prefix) review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 20, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw moved this to In review in PyPCAPKit Oct 20, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

GOOD TO GO at 22bd359d8. A Sonnet review ran the new count against job 116172356218, the one real GraalPy raise. It still counts INTERNALERROR> E MemoryError. E MemoryError: msg, bare MemoryError and exception-group | MemoryError match. The docstring and source-line forms the old grep counted (raise MemoryError, java.lang.OutOfMemoryError) do not. The step greps the tee file, which has no timestamp prefix, so the ^ anchor holds. With the old grep the pin fails (6 failed), and actionlint is clean.

@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 20, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Coverage: 90.07% (unit tier, Python 3.15, 22bd359d8, Unit Tests run success)

Package Statements Missed Branches Partial Cover
pcapkit (top level) 104 2 20 2 96.77%
pcapkit/const 19597 881 2618 867 92.11%
pcapkit/corekit 2505 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.

@JarryShaw
JarryShaw merged commit d886994 into main Oct 20, 2026
62 checks passed
@JarryShaw
JarryShaw deleted the ci/1962-memoryerror-count branch October 20, 2026 04:01
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this from In review to Done in PyPCAPKit Oct 20, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw removed the review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate label Oct 20, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw added this to the PyPCAPKit v1.5 milestone Oct 26, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ci Pull requests that change CI or workflow configuration (ci: subject prefix)

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

ci(experimental): the GraalPy MemoryError count matches a docstring, not a raised exception

1 participant