Skip to content

Conversation

@SpecLad
Copy link
Contributor

@SpecLad SpecLad commented Jan 27, 2026

Motivation and context

I've always wondered what it was used for. Turns out, absolutely nothing.

How has this been tested?

Checklist

  • I submit my changes into the develop branch
  • [ ] I have created a changelog fragment
  • [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly
  • [ ] I have added tests to cover my changes
  • [ ] I have linked related issues (see GitHub docs)

License

  • I submit my code changes under the same MIT License that covers the project.
    Feel free to contact the maintainers if that's a concern.

I've always wondered what it was used for. Turns out, absolutely nothing.
@SpecLad SpecLad marked this pull request as ready for review January 27, 2026 10:57
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 27, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 84.00000% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 82.62%. Comparing base (20f9557) to head (655f0d8).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop   #10222     +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage    82.62%   82.62%             
==========================================
  Files          481      430     -51     
  Lines        49622    46546   -3076     
  Branches      4174     4174             
==========================================
- Hits         40998    38457   -2541     
+ Misses        8624     8089    -535     
Components Coverage Δ
cvat-ui 77.58% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
cvat-server 86.89% <84.00%> (+0.47%) ⬆️
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@SpecLad SpecLad requested a review from zhiltsov-max January 27, 2026 11:30
@SpecLad
Copy link
Contributor Author

SpecLad commented Jan 27, 2026

@zhiltsov-max I tried to apply your suggestion from #10215, but the frame tuple types used across the code base vary in what's allowed as the first element, so I wasn't able to reuse the tuple types outside of IMediaReader and its subclasses. 🫤

Comment on lines 246 to 247
# In both of these tuples, the first element is either the path to the frame or its contents.
# In ImageFrame, the second element is the path to the frame.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Consider adding a docstring. It works at least in VS Code:

image

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, updated. I left VideoFrame without a docstring, since it seems self-explanatory.

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