refactor(protocol-designer): call getMatchingTipLiquidSpecsFromSpec() with tiprackDef #19901
Conversation
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
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## chore_release-pd-8.6.1 #19901 +/- ##
=======================================================
Coverage 58.00% 58.00%
=======================================================
Files 3413 3413
Lines 283910 283906 -4
Branches 39369 39369
=======================================================
Hits 164671 164671
+ Misses 118966 118962 -4
Partials 273 273
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
ncdiehl11
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2025
| ?.byTipType.find(byTipType => byTipType.tiprack === tiprack) | ||
| // TODO: this won't find the definition for a custom tiprack | ||
| const tiprackDef = getAllDefinitions()[tiprack] | ||
| console.assert(tiprackDef, `could not find labware definition for ${tiprack}`) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
just to be a bit more explicit
Suggested change
| console.assert(tiprackDef, `could not find labware definition for ${tiprack}`) | |
| console.assert(tiprackDef != null, `could not find labware definition for ${tiprack}`) |
| pipetteSpecs: PipetteV2Specs, | ||
| volume: number, | ||
| tiprackUri: string | ||
| tiprackDef: LabwareDefinition2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I'm understanding this, I think this type should be a union including null
Suggested change
| tiprackDef: LabwareDefinition2 | |
| tiprackDef: LabwareDefinition2 | null |
| .find(byPipette => byPipette.pipetteModel === pipetteName) | ||
| ?.byTipType.find(byTipType => byTipType.tiprack === tiprack) | ||
| // TODO: this won't find the definition for a custom tiprack | ||
| const tiprackDef = getAllDefinitions()[tiprack] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
for types to agree when passing this arg
Suggested change
| const tiprackDef = getAllDefinitions()[tiprack] | |
| const tiprackDef = getAllDefinitions()[tiprack] ?? null |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Overview
Part 5 for tiprack definition lookups in PD.
Back in PR #19041, @ncdiehl11 introduced the function
getMatchingTipLiquidSpecsFromSpec()that takes a tiprack URI and tries to look up the tiprack definition. It sometimes fails, producing Sentry errors like:However, there is no need for
getMatchingTipLiquidSpecsFromSpec()itself to look up the tiprack definition, because the caller already has the tiprack definition.So this PR changes
getMatchingTipLiquidSpecsFromSpec()to take a tiprack labware definition instead of a tiprack URI.Note that the existing implementation in
load-file/migration/8_5_0.tsto find the tiprack definition is not quite correct, and would fail for custom tipracks. But we'll fix that in a future PR.Test Plan and Hands on Testing
CI tests.
Risk assessment
Low.