Skip to content

refactor(qpk): B06 value-target execution vs presentation facade - #654

Merged
Pigbibi merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
rebuild/b06-execution-presentation-facade
Oct 9, 2026
Merged

Pigbibi merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
rebuild/b06-execution-presentation-facade

Conversation

@Pigbibi

@Pigbibi Pigbibi commented Oct 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • B06 / N05 first mechanical slice: quant_platform_kit.common.presentation with semantics / display / plan-presentation types.
  • New build_value_target_execution_runtime_plan does not take dashboard-layout kwargs (portfolio_rows_layout / execution_fields live on ValueTargetPlanPresentation).
  • build_value_target_runtime_plan remains a compatibility facade (same kwargs → same payload).
  • Docs: docs/b06_execution_presentation_facade.zh-CN.md.

Out of scope (follow-ups)

  • Migrate platform decision_mapper callers to the new API
  • Remove mixed fields from ValueTargetExecutionAnnotations
  • Move SOXL formulas out of runtime_inputs.py (B03/B07)

Test plan

  • uv run --with pytest python -m pytest tests/test_value_target_presentation_facade.py tests/test_strategy_contracts.py -q (38 passed)
  • No CloudAgent; no LB-HK/Firstrade/ingress changes

B06/N05 first slice: add presentation types and
build_value_target_execution_runtime_plan without dashboard-layout
kwargs. Keep build_value_target_runtime_plan as a compatibility facade
so existing platform imports/payloads stay behavior-equivalent.
@Pigbibi
Pigbibi merged commit f90644d into main Oct 9, 2026
1 check passed
@Pigbibi
Pigbibi deleted the rebuild/b06-execution-presentation-facade branch October 9, 2026 08:35
Pigbibi added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2026
B06/N05 follow-up after #654: keep ValueTargetExecutionAnnotations as the
compat wire aggregate, but make ValueTargetExecutionSemantics +
ValueTargetDisplayAnnotations the preferred construction path.

- VALUE_TARGET_DISPLAY_FIELD_NAMES as presentation field source of truth
- split/resolve helpers; runtime plan accepts semantics=/display=
- build_value_target_execution_annotations uses split→merge (equiv)
- do not delete mixed fields yet (B03/B12 consumer adoption gate)

Co-authored-by: Pigbibi <pigbibi@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant