Skip to content

Conversation

@JamesMurkin
Copy link
Contributor

This used to reconcile the scheduling context with an intermediate state, however that intermediate state has since been removed

It is no longer obvious what this should reconcile as really the only way to work out what should have been evicted would be to work something that does the same logic as the original code its validating

We could update this code to do some new form of reconciliation but I think instead we should remove it as:

  • We now have better test coverage of this and test coverage makes more sense than assertions
  • The assertions code typically rots and generally is something we're deprecating

This used to reconcile the scheduling context with an intermediate state, however that intermediate state has since been removed

It is no longer obvious what this should reconcile as really the only way to work out what should have been evicted would be to work something that does the same logic as the original code its validating

We could update this code to do some new form of reconciliation but I think instead we should remove it as:
 - We now have better test coverage of this and test coverage makes more sense than assertions
 - The assertions code typically rots and generally is something we're deprecating

Signed-off-by: JamesMurkin <[email protected]>
@JamesMurkin JamesMurkin marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2025 17:15
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.

2 participants