Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add draft 0.1 of document ID detection-infinities-nans #823

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 29, 2025

Conversation

MichaelRFairhurst
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Add draft of document ID codeql-coding-standards/design/detection-infinities-nans

Change request type

  • Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
  • Internal documentation
  • External documentation
  • Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
  • External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

  • No rules added
  • Queries have been added for the following rules:
    • rule number here
  • Queries have been modified for the following rules:
    • rule number here

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

  • The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
  • The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
  • The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

  • Yes
  • No

🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.

  • Confirmed

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

  • Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

  • Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
  • Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
  • Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
  • Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
  • Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
    As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
  • Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
  • Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
  • Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
  • Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

@Copilot Copilot bot review requested due to automatic review settings December 13, 2024 21:15
Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

docs/design/detection_of_genenated_infinities_and_nans.md:1

  • The word 'genenated' in the file name should be 'generated'.
# Coding Standards: Detection of generated Infinities and NaNs

docs/design/detection_of_genenated_infinities_and_nans.md:69

  • [nitpick] The sentence 'This proposal is that we, for the purposes of this rule, create a new range analysis for floats where otherwise undeterminable values are assumed to be a very large range that is small compared to the range of floating point values, such as +/-1e15.' is unclear. Consider rephrasing for clarity.
We will create a new float-specific version of range analysis. The actual values stored in floating point variables in real programs are very unlikely to be close to the limits of finite floating point numbers (+/- 3.4e38 for floats, 1.8e308 for doubles). This proposal is that we, for the purposes of this rule, create a new range analysis for floats where otherwise undeterminable values are assumed to be a very large range that is small compared to the range of floating point values, such as +/-1e15.

Tip: Leave feedback on Copilot's review comments with the 👎 and 👍 buttons to help improve review quality. Learn more

@lcartey lcartey added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 29, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit a74e904 Jan 29, 2025
25 checks passed
@lcartey lcartey deleted the michaelrfairhurst/add-directive-4-15-document branch January 29, 2025 11:32
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