remove extraneous tixrixqid code

[bmschmidt]

There is some code in the tixrixqid file which is neither used, nor well conceived. So I'm removing it.

[bmschmidt]

• qid as number, number and cleanup fromArrow #197
• remove extraneous tixrixqid code #196 👈 (View in Graphite)
• allow selection.get to return a qid #193
• update evaluation set size on sortedDataSelection #192 : 1 other dependent PR (#172 )
• no linting in ci #194 : 1 other dependent PR (#81 )
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[ellipsis-dev]

Caution

Changes requested ❌

Reviewed everything up to be1bb51 in 1 minute and 52 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 77 lines of code in 1 files
• Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 4 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. src/tixrixqid.ts:100

• Draft comment:
  Ensure that accessing tile.record_batch.get(qid[1]) matches the updated Qid type (a single row index) compared to the earlier qid[1][0].
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment looked like it was already resolved.

2. src/tixrixqid.ts:136

• Draft comment:
  Using tile.tix instead of tileKey_to_tix(tile.key) is acceptable if tile.tix is always correctly set; confirm that this holds across all tile objects.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 70% The comment is asking the PR author to confirm that a condition holds true across all tile objects. This violates the rule against asking the author to confirm their intention or to ensure behavior is intended. The comment does not provide a specific code suggestion or ask for a specific test to be written, which would have been acceptable.

3. src/tixrixqid.ts:178

• Draft comment:
  Removal of getQidArrayFromRows and selectQixOnTile cleans up unused legacy functions. Verify no dependent code relies on these functions, as this is a breaking change.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Comment did not seem useful. Confidence is useful = 0% <= threshold 70% The comment is asking the PR author to verify that no dependent code relies on the removed functions, which is against the rules. It is not making a specific suggestion or pointing out a specific issue with the code.

4. src/tixrixqid.ts:25

• Draft comment:
  Typographical/lexicographical note: The comment refers to "Rixen" (a list of row indices), but the type for Qid now uses "Rix". Please update the comment for consistency with the current type.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Marked as duplicate.

Workflow ID: wflow_Xp6pHE6FhAODfvsa

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Update the comment for Qid to reflect it now represents a pair [Tix, Rix] (a tile index and a single row index), not a Tix with a Rixen array.

Suggested change

	// A Qid is a pair of a Tix and a Rixen. It identifies a set of rows in a tile.
	// A Qid is a pair [Tix, Rix], representing a tile index and a single row index within that tile.

[bmschmidt]

Merge activity

• May 27, 12:27 PM UTC: A user started a stack merge that includes this pull request via Graphite.
• May 27, 12:29 PM UTC: Graphite rebased this pull request as part of a merge.
• May 27, 12:31 PM UTC: @bmschmidt merged this pull request with Graphite.