Context
Follow-up from review discussion on #624 (tool_req__arch_linkage_safety).
Issue
In docs/internals/requirements/requirements.rst, the linkage table under tool_req__arch_linkage_safety documents:
comp, implements, logic_arc_int, no, yes
comp, uses, logic_arc_int, no, yes
However, src/extensions/score_metamodel/metamodel.yaml allows both implements and uses from comp to target either logic_arc_int or real_arc_int_op:
optional_links:
implements: logic_arc_int, real_arc_int_op
uses: logic_arc_int, real_arc_int_op
The table only lists logic_arc_int as a target, so it doesn't fully mirror the metamodel for these two relations.
Suggested fix
Either:
- Add rows for
comp, implements, real_arc_int_op and comp, uses, real_arc_int_op, or
- If the omission is intentional (table only documents the safety-relevant subset per
gd_req__arch_linkage_safety), note that explicitly in the table/requirement text.
Reference
Context
Follow-up from review discussion on #624 (
tool_req__arch_linkage_safety).Issue
In
docs/internals/requirements/requirements.rst, the linkage table undertool_req__arch_linkage_safetydocuments:However,
src/extensions/score_metamodel/metamodel.yamlallows bothimplementsandusesfromcompto target eitherlogic_arc_intorreal_arc_int_op:The table only lists
logic_arc_intas a target, so it doesn't fully mirror the metamodel for these two relations.Suggested fix
Either:
comp, implements, real_arc_int_opandcomp, uses, real_arc_int_op, orgd_req__arch_linkage_safety), note that explicitly in the table/requirement text.Reference