Repository navigation
The tap.python plan after review: Max's documentation system, a book, the test gaps, and three decisions (2.0.0) - #42
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…e gaps After the maintainer's review. 9.4 now covers what Max's package system offers beyond reference pages and help files: a vignette, three tutorials with patchers, an Extras overview named as the landing patcher, help tabs for both objects, and CI checks for what is written by hand; 9.0 finds where Max reads the files from. A new 9.7, the family's mdBook, follows 1.1.0, with example code and performance tables pulled from what ships. Test coverage had four gaps: no sanitizer rows for the Max glue, where the new lock lives (9.3); a performance sentence with no measurement behind it — a bench row (9.1); no soak for the new object (9.5); and the hand-made pages, help patchers and init/ file unchecked (9.3, 9.4). Also: the output table as a data-driven test over its edges and core tests for the new examples (9.1), and the audio-thread predicate injected so the Scheduler-in-Audio-Interrupt notice is testable without Max (9.3). Windows stays by hand, written down as a limit. The roadmap's Phase 9 follows. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WnyasLjC6poziMpwguw4in
…ignette separate Decided by the maintainer on 2026-10-09: the list[...] parameter is a contract change under the CHANGELOG's rule, so the release that carries tap.python is 2.0.0, not 1.1.0; a str return outputs as the spike finds composes best against route, sel, prepend and a message box; and the vignette is the short form, written separately, not generated from the book. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WnyasLjC6poziMpwguw4in
…st commit missed The last commit changed the version numbers but stopped before the sentences that record why: the list[...] parameter is a contract change, so 2.0.0; the str return is the spike's to decide; the vignette is written separately as the short form. They are in now, with the revision record. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WnyasLjC6poziMpwguw4in
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this changes
Docs only. The three commits that followed the maintainer's review of #41, which merged before they were pushed:
tap.pythonis 2.0.0, not 1.1.0; astrreturn outputs as the spike finds composes best; the vignette is the short form, written separately.Why
The review found the plan thin on documentation and with four gaps in test coverage.
Documentation was reference pages and help files only. Max's package system also offers vignettes and tutorials in
docs, patchers inextras, and a landing patcher named inpackage-info.json. 9.4 now has a vignette (Writing Max objects in Python), three tutorials with patchers, an Extras overview named as the landing patcher, help tabs for both objects, and one CI script that checks the hand-written XML and the help patchers' JSON. 9.0, the spike, finds where Max reads the vignette and tutorial files from, since the package documentation does not say. 9.7 is the family's mdBook after 2.0.0, with example code and performance tables pulled from what ships so the book cannot drift; the ReadMe then becomes the front door.Test coverage had four gaps: no sanitizer rows for the Max glue job, where the new lock lives (9.3); a performance sentence with no measurement behind it, now a bench row (9.1); no soak for the new object (9.5); and the hand-made pages, help patchers and
init/file unchecked (9.3, 9.4). Also added: the output table as a data-driven test over its edges and core tests for the new examples (9.1), and the audio-thread predicate injected so the Scheduler-in-Audio-Interrupt notice is testable without Max (9.3). Windows stays by hand, written down as a limit.The decisions. The
list[…]parameter changes what atap.python~method with such a hint receives (the empty symbol today); the maintainer applied the CHANGELOG's rule as written, so the release is 2.0.0. Every1.1.0in the plan and the roadmap is now2.0.0, with the reason beside it.Verification
Prose only. The claims about Max's package folders were checked against Cycling '74's current package documentation; every item 9.0 through 9.7 appears once in the plan and its section links resolve, checked by script. Nothing in the plan is built; 9.0 is the first code PR.
Notes for the reviewer
list[…]parameter is 2.0.0.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01WnyasLjC6poziMpwguw4in
Generated by Claude Code