Skip to content

Bump reference/root-io-spec to c65c464 (still ROOT 6.40.04) - #124

Open
sathabbott wants to merge 1 commit into
nsmith-:mainfrom
sathabbott:chore/bump-root-io-spec
Open

sathabbott wants to merge 1 commit into
nsmith-:mainfrom
sathabbott:chore/bump-root-io-spec

Conversation

@sathabbott

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

🤖 AI generated content

Bumps reference/root-io-spec from 9c3f776 (2026-09-18) to c65c464 (2026-09-24). It still pins ROOT 6.40.04 (1211eda), the latest stable release, so the tracked RNTuple specification (v1.0.2.1) is the same document; no code changes.

It is the first of a series of RNTuple fixes (#75, #55, #114, #49, #51, #85, #116–#122), several of which test against fixtures that only exist at the new pin:

  • rntuple/compressed.root: the only compressed anchor and compressed envelopes in any corpus (scikit-hep-testdata's RNTuple anchors are all uncompressed)
  • rntuple/map.root: page locators that share byte ranges
  • rntuple/attributes.root: linked attribute sets, audited upstream in root-io-spec 385a3e2 with ERRATA 11–13 ([rntuple] Footer Envelope: Handle Linked Attribute Set Record Frames #51)

All three read on main today.

New expected failures. Four fixtures new since 9c3f776 fail, none of them RNTuple. Each is listed in EXPECTED_FAILURES with its exact error, per the module's rule:

Fixture Error Issue
classes/roofit buffer not empty after reading object of type RooLinkedList #71
serialization/pointer-collection Expected a version in the StdVector header — the slot's class record followed by the content class's own frame #105
serialization/unframed-records TDatime / TObject / TStringLong / TQObject as records with no byte count #123 (new), #101
written/two-versions Grown at versions 1 and 2; the version-1 object is read with version 2's info #22

Tests: full suite 397 passed, 61 skipped, 50 xfailed locally (was 354 passed, 53 skipped, 46 xfailed at 9c3f776). CI's non-recursive submodule checkout is unchanged.

Assisted-by: claude-code:claude-opus-5-5

root-io-spec moves from 9c3f776 (2026-09-18) to c65c464 (2026-09-24), 68
commits. It still pins ROOT 6.40.04 (1211eda), the latest stable release,
so the tracked RNTuple specification (v1.0.2.1) is the same document.

It adds three RNTuple fixtures, all of which read:
- rntuple/compressed: the only compressed anchor and envelopes in the corpus
- rntuple/map: page locators that share byte ranges
- rntuple/attributes: linked attribute sets

Four new non-RNTuple fixtures fail. Each is listed in EXPECTED_FAILURES
with its exact error and the issue that tracks it:
- classes/roofit: nsmith-#71
- serialization/pointer-collection: nsmith-#105
- serialization/unframed-records: nsmith-#123, nsmith-#101
- written/two-versions: nsmith-#22

Assisted-by: claude-code:claude-opus-5-5
@codecov-commenter

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.16%. Comparing base (3f43287) to head (5e34e43).
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #124      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.82%   92.16%   +0.33%     
==========================================
  Files          37       37              
  Lines        2962     2962              
==========================================
+ Hits         2720     2730      +10     
+ Misses        242      232      -10     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@sathabbott

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@nsmith- I've reviewed and approved this, but will let you see it before it merges.

@nsmith- nsmith- left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Makes sense

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

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants