Feature/remove legacy dataset

[TonyXiang8787]

Closes #431

Also make meta_data as input argument for many classes, instead of hard code to the automatically generated constexpr version. In this way, it is possible to do unit test with mocked meta_data.

Check list

• [x] Calculation core
• [x] C API
• [x] C Example
• [x] C API test
• [ ] Unit test
• [ ] Integration test
• [ ] Validation test
• [ ] Benchmark

[TonyXiang8787]

@mgovers It is far from finished. I just put here to see what you think. The tap position optimizer, we still need to make it compile with mocked meta_data.

[mgovers]

@mgovers It is far from finished. I just put here to see what you think. The tap position optimizer, we still need to make it compile with mocked meta_data.

i'll have a look

[TonyXiang8787]

how do you expect this to be extensible to columnar data format? or is this a first refactoring to make that possible in the future? because i foresee a future where some components are columnar and some are row-based. basically, each component has its own combination of

• homogenous
• indptr
• componentptr
• attributeptr where for row-major, componentptr comes before attributeptr and vice versa for columnar data

When we have columnar data format. The Dataset can produce a std::span for row-based buffer, or a custom range adaptor with all individual attribute pointers. I guess we also need custom iterators (and maybe proxy object) to make it work.

[TonyXiang8787]

@mgovers it's now ready for review

[mgovers]

@mgovers it's now ready for review

will have a look

Quality Gate passed

Issues 18 New issues 0 Accepted issues

Measures 0 Security Hotspots 93.5% Coverage on New Code 0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

can you please have a look at the address sanitizer error in the gcc release build + the sonar cloud issues?

[TonyXiang8787]

@mgovers it's now ready for review

will have a look

Quality Gate passed

Issues 18 New issues 0 Accepted issues Measures 0 Security Hotspots 93.5% Coverage on New Code 0.0% Duplication on New Code See analysis details on SonarCloud

can you please have a look at the address sanitizer error in the gcc release build + the sonar cloud issues?

gcc build is fixed.

[TonyXiang8787]

@mgovers all comments resolved.

[sonarqubecloud[bot]]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
6 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
93.5% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[mgovers]

out of scope of this ticket but we may need to version bump sonar:

[TonyXiang8787]

out of scope of this ticket but we may need to version bump sonar:

Do we just have to modify like this? https://docs.sonarsource.com/sonarcloud/advanced-setup/languages/c-c-objective-c/#executing-the-analysis

[mgovers]

out of scope of this ticket but we may need to version bump sonar:

Do we just have to modify like this? https://docs.sonarsource.com/sonarcloud/advanced-setup/languages/c-c-objective-c/#executing-the-analysis

i think so, yes. i haven't had a look at what the compile_commands.json are supposed to be in our particular case, but that's indeed what it complains about