Skip to content

Adds another level of hierarchy with the EventSetupRecord Type when the report from moduleAllocMonitor for event setup data is displayed - #55

Open
gartung wants to merge 7 commits into
fwyzard:masterfrom
gartung:record-outer-ring
Open

Adds another level of hierarchy with the EventSetupRecord Type when the report from moduleAllocMonitor for event setup data is displayed #55
gartung wants to merge 7 commits into
fwyzard:masterfrom
gartung:record-outer-ring

Conversation

@gartung

@gartung gartung commented Dec 19, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@gartung

gartung commented Dec 19, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author
image

@fwyzard

fwyzard commented Dec 22, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@gartung could you clarify what the code change does, and what is the use case ?
Thanks.

@gartung

gartung commented Dec 22, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@makortel request that the event setup record class label and name be added as the outer two rings instead of the record class name as third ring.

@gartung gartung closed this Jan 12, 2026
@gartung gartung reopened this Jan 12, 2026
@gartung

gartung commented Jan 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

If there is a non-empty record field in the dictionary create a new level of hierarchy with the record field as the value.

@gartung gartung changed the title The takes the report from moduleAllocMonitor for event setup data and displays the record type and class as the outer two rings. Takes the report from moduleAllocMonitor for event setup data and displays the record type and class as the outer two rings. Jan 20, 2026
@gartung gartung changed the title Takes the report from moduleAllocMonitor for event setup data and displays the record type and class as the outer two rings. Adds another level of hierarchy with the EventSetupRecord Type when the report from moduleAllocMonitor for event setup data is displayed Jan 21, 2026
@makortel

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@fwyzard Do you have further questions or comments?

@fwyzard

fwyzard commented Jan 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

no, sorry, just haven't had the time to check it yet 🤷🏻‍♂️

@fwyzard

fwyzard commented Jan 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@gartung can you fix the indentation for the new code ?

@fwyzard

fwyzard commented Jan 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Also, from a cursory look the old and new code seem to have a lot in common.
Rather than duplicating the full block, can it be refactored to reuse the common parts ?

@gartung

gartung commented Feb 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@fwyzard I updated the code to avoid duplication of the code block. I wrapped the parts that require record field in if statements.

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