Matter: Update profile parsing from ipairs to pairs#2807
Open
hcarter-775 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Open
Matter: Update profile parsing from ipairs to pairs#2807hcarter-775 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
hcarter-775 wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
hcarter-775
requested review from
NoahCornell,
cjswedes,
ctowns,
gharveymn,
greens and
nickolas-deboom
|
Invitation URL: |
Test Results 72 files 487 suites 0s ⏱️ Results for commit f9fec6e. ♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results. |
|
matter-lock_coverage.xml
matter-sensor_coverage.xml
matter-switch_coverage.xml
Minimum allowed coverage is Generated by 🐒 cobertura-action against f9fec6e |
NoahCornell
reviewed
Feb 25, 2026
| local prev_cap_ids = {} | ||
| for _, capability in ipairs(prev_component.capabilities or {}) do | ||
| for _, capability in pairs(prev_component.capabilities or {}) do | ||
| prev_cap_ids[capability.id] = true |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: Since component.capabilities are already keyed by capability ID, I don't think we need to build up the new table but I don't think we need to change it if it has already been tested as is
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, I think I did this to try and be clever. The idea was that I loop through this once and make the table, so now when I loop through the other list I just check in O(1) if the key exists, therefore making this a O(n) + O(n) operation rather than O(n^2).
Of course, we're talking a speed up on max 10 values so this is likely slowing things down or doing nothing at all.
NoahCornell
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
hcarter-775
force-pushed
the
update/profile-table-parsing
branch
from
00b2346 to
f9fec6e
Compare
ctowns
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
greens
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
gharveymn
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
cjswedes
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
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
6 participants
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.
Description of Change
Upon investigation, the structure of the
profiletable object being parsed is slightly different than what is expected here. Specifically, thecapabilitiestable has explicit string keys rather than the ordered integer keys that were initially expected. Therefore, the size check for thecapabilitiestable will always returns 0, and the loop needs to usepairsinstead ofipairs.To note, the integration test framework handles these profiles as a ordered-numerical table (which the original implementation had assumed to be correct).
Summary of Completed Tests
Tested on-device.