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

documentation: manual doesn't describe trace format #601

Open
yarden opened this issue Aug 15, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

documentation: manual doesn't describe trace format #601

yarden opened this issue Aug 15, 2019 · 4 comments

Comments

@yarden
Copy link
Contributor

yarden commented Aug 15, 2019

As far as I can tell, the trace file (generated by -trace option to KaSim) isn't documented anywhere. Traces don't appear at all in the latest Kappa PDF manual and the format isn't described elsewhere (including in the Trace Query Language page).

@hmedina
Copy link
Collaborator

hmedina commented Aug 15, 2019

Indeed! I'll just add that the TQL uses the KaSim parser, so it itself doesn't know (or care) about the trace format. Only KaSim knows what's in that gargantuan one-liner.

@pirbo
Copy link
Member

pirbo commented Sep 20, 2019

So... there is an (hidden) attempt of documentation at https://tools.kappalanguage.org/kappa-trace-checker/trace-format-description.html but yes it need to be improved join a visible place!

@yarden
Copy link
Contributor Author

yarden commented Sep 27, 2019

Thanks @pirbo. A quick clarification: conversations with Jonathan suggested that the trace format is determined semi-automatically by serialization libraries used by KaSim - meaning it doesn't necessarily have a fixed format. Is that no longer true? Just trying to understand how the trace format was/is determined.

@pirbo
Copy link
Member

pirbo commented Sep 30, 2019

The serialization library for reading and writing the trace used in Kappa software does not generate automatically the format of the trace. We have control on the scheme of the JSON it generates.
That does not mean that I don't dislike this quickly and dirtily determined format and therefore that I change it on occasion to go toward what I think it should be :-).
If your underlying question is : can I rely on the trace format to write my analyses? This is a good question and we should discuss what you need and what you're trying to compute in order to determine if you live in a satisfactory and therefore stable subset of the trace schema or not... :-)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants