Skip to content

docs(protocols): fourth whole-repo pass over link and transport protocols (#1103) - #1908

Open
JarryShaw wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/1103d-linktrans
Open

JarryShaw wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/1103d-linktrans

Conversation

@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Please follow the guide below

What is the purpose of your pull request?

Tick the commit type your subject line carries.

  • fix — corrects a defect
  • feat — adds a feature
  • perf — changes performance, not behaviour
  • refactor — changes neither behaviour nor performance
  • test — tests only
  • docs — documentation only
  • ci — workflows or build tooling
  • release — bumps the version or rolls up a distribution
  • chore — anything else

The fourth whole-repo prose pass of #1103, over the link and transport protocols. It changes prose only: every changed .py file's AST is unchanged once string expressions are blanked, except where a docstring is added or vendor template text is edited together with its generated const file.

Rendering:

  • Drop the inline DefaultDict[...]: type prefix from the registry
    attribute comments in link, loopback, TCP, UDP and SCTP; it rendered
    a second, unlinked Type field naming private aliases and a key type
    that disagreed with the signature.

Accuracy:

  • L2TP: cite RFC 3931 section 4.1.1.1 for the session-header quote and
    section 4.7.2 for port 1701 being shared with L2TPv2.
  • L2TP: HTTP._guess_version identifies the version first and
    trial-parses only as a last resort, as the docs page already said.

Wording:

  • "c.f." becomes "see"; "implements extractor" gains its article.
  • UDP length field: "header included"; a missing full stop in the TCP
    schema.

Refs #1103

…cols (#1103)

Rendering:
- Drop the inline `DefaultDict[...]:` type prefix from the registry
  attribute comments in link, loopback, TCP, UDP and SCTP; it rendered
  a second, unlinked Type field naming private aliases and a key type
  that disagreed with the signature.

Accuracy:
- L2TP: cite RFC 3931 section 4.1.1.1 for the session-header quote and
  section 4.7.2 for port 1701 being shared with L2TPv2.
- L2TP: HTTP._guess_version identifies the version first and
  trial-parses only as a last resort, as the docs page already said.

Wording:
- "c.f." becomes "see"; "implements extractor" gains its article.
- UDP length field: "header included"; a missing full stop in the TCP
  schema.

Refs #1103
@JarryShaw JarryShaw added docs Pull requests that change documentation only (docs: subject prefix) review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 19, 2026
@JarryShaw JarryShaw moved this to In review in PyPCAPKit Oct 19, 2026
@JarryShaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

GOOD TO GO at 639b791b4. A Sonnet cross-review checked the RFC 3931 §4.1.1.1 and §4.7.2 citations against the RFC text and the _guess_version wording against the code. It confirmed that every dropped DefaultDict[...]: prefix keeps a # type: comment, and the AST guard shows all changed .py identical. tests/project passes.

@JarryShaw JarryShaw added review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate and removed review: running A cross-review is in flight against the current head - no verdict yet labels Oct 19, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Coverage: 90.07% (unit tier, Python 3.15, 639b791b4, Unit Tests run success)

Package Statements Missed Branches Partial Cover
pcapkit (top level) 104 2 20 2 96.77%
pcapkit/const 19595 881 2618 867 92.11%
pcapkit/corekit 2504 70 792 36 96.54%
pcapkit/dumpkit 276 3 100 3 98.40%
pcapkit/foundation 2916 164 1016 34 93.59%
pcapkit/interface 138 7 52 5 93.68%
pcapkit/protocols 17411 224 4580 189 98.10%
pcapkit/toolkit 872 177 298 8 77.18%
pcapkit/utilities 522 2 158 4 99.12%
pcapkit/vendor 4431 2341 1018 156 43.64%

Per-file detail: the coverage-html artifact of this run.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

docs Pull requests that change documentation only (docs: subject prefix) review: good-to-go Cross-review at the current head says ready; CI state is separate

Projects

Status: In review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant