Skip to content

Conversation

@gilesknap
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.55%. Comparing base (a2a7808) to head (b9146f7).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #283   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.55%   90.55%           
=======================================
  Files          69       69           
  Lines        2414     2414           
=======================================
  Hits         2186     2186           
  Misses        228      228           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

Copy link
Contributor

@GDYendell GDYendell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is pretty impressive, but it would be a lot of work before being able to merge this.

- Simple scalar values only

**Use PVA only** when:
- Only modern clients (Phoebus)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It figured out that CA supports phoebus before

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure what you intend by this comment?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It suggests that Phoebus is PVA only

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't agree! It is saying if you are only using modern clients then you can choose to use PVA only.

# Connection lost - will try to reconnect
logger.error("Device connection lost")
raise
```
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems to have figured out that raising in an update loop stops it, but then asserts that the connection error arm will reconnect, which it will not.

Overall this doesn't make a huge amount of sense.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll address this in the next pass


assert attr.get() == 23.5
mock_connection.send_query.assert_called_once_with("TEMP?\r\n")
```
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is not bad, but it is just a copy of a FastCS test and not something I would test in a specific driver.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In the next pass I'll review the working driver it has made and include some tests from that

- **Learn about dynamic drivers**: See [](dynamic-drivers.md) for runtime device introspection
- **Explore other transports**: Add Tango, GraphQL, or REST alongside EPICS
- **Implement methods**: Use `@command` and `@scan` decorators for complex operations
- **Read the architecture explanation**: Understand how FastCS works under the hood
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should ask it to write this

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was thinking the same thing on the way to work - I will make it happen.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@gilesknap gilesknap left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the feedback. I have implemented all obvious changes and will come back to the others after I have refined the 'stage 1' fastcs-zebra code.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@gilesknap gilesknap left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should maybe not waste any more time on this for now, given your comments this morning. I had hoped that we would be able to decide on abandoning it with less effort but like you said it was worth a shot.


# Or in the devcontainer
python my_device.py
```
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Gah I thought I deleted the devcontainer bit.

@GDYendell GDYendell closed this Dec 16, 2025
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