From 5121ce8218d2be9989e80d39b205eb4a1ae84842 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 11:46:07 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 1/7] Draft initial proposal for benchmark-harness reliability --- .DS_Store | Bin 0 -> 6148 bytes .idea/.gitignore | 10 ++ .idea/encodings.xml | 4 + .idea/modules.xml | 8 ++ ...l-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml | 8 ++ .idea/vcs.xml | 6 ++ .../proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 95 ++++++++++++++++++ 7 files changed, 131 insertions(+) create mode 100644 .DS_Store create mode 100644 .idea/.gitignore create mode 100644 .idea/encodings.xml create mode 100644 .idea/modules.xml create mode 100644 .idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml create mode 100644 .idea/vcs.xml create mode 100644 Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md diff --git a/.DS_Store b/.DS_Store new file mode 100644 index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..585762a83989a23f088ff6d7ed02f8bab26acc50 GIT binary patch literal 6148 zcmeHKJxc>o5S-N%0h=^}<@*V0VSR+8wzwalh#&z?z!2-}{M*icC>|FrEo3&#&U<^i z?{QPyW&zmp@OT9*0L%$zyt|v4KX***q#{Npc*X{M{x;ZQJIOvC@Y-|qIN$*J$Z|JTG1^Z&R=J1HOq{*?kYTlK3YU#WWQVIYrf|5u6Rg}a>k>atUm&-i%bgqg#sVf0vI#^ literal 0 HcmV?d00001 diff --git a/.idea/.gitignore b/.idea/.gitignore new file mode 100644 index 0000000..30cf57e --- /dev/null +++ b/.idea/.gitignore @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +# Default ignored files +/shelf/ +/workspace.xml +# Editor-based HTTP Client requests +/httpRequests/ +# Ignored default folder with query files +/queries/ +# Datasource local storage ignored files +/dataSources/ +/dataSources.local.xml diff --git a/.idea/encodings.xml b/.idea/encodings.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..df87cf9 --- /dev/null +++ b/.idea/encodings.xml @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/.idea/modules.xml b/.idea/modules.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c3de23d --- /dev/null +++ b/.idea/modules.xml @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ + + + + + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/.idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml b/.idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c956989 --- /dev/null +++ b/.idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ + + + + + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/.idea/vcs.xml b/.idea/vcs.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..35eb1dd --- /dev/null +++ b/.idea/vcs.xml @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ + + + + + + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..b40376f --- /dev/null +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -0,0 +1,95 @@ +# Proposal Submission — SOSE 2026 + +--- + +## Team Details* 👥 + +**Mentor's Name:** Hana Gabrielle Bidon + +**Team Members:** + +| GitHub Username | Full Name | +|-----------------|----------------------| +| @Danyccsf | Dany Valverde Caldas | + +--- + +## p5.js Issue* 📋 + +- **Related graphics context:** https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953 + +- Issue Title: Support transformation matrices in p5.strands + +- Repository: https://github.com/processing/p5.js + +**Proposal status**: This benchmark-reliability proposal is independent of #8953’s assigned transformation-matrix work. I am requesting maintainer approval for this direction; if approved, I will work with maintainers to create or link the appropriate p5.js issue before implementation. + +--- + +## Abstract* 📝 + +My proposal focuses on improving the reliability of the p5.js benchmarking suite. During local testing, I identified a reproducible defect in benchmark cleanup that emitted Friendly Error System (FES) validation messages while the benchmark still passed. I propose a focused audit of related geometry cleanup code, a maintainer-approved safeguard for unexpected validation messages, and reproducible benchmark guidance. The goal is to improve the diagnostic quality and maintainability of benchmark runs. + +--- + +## Problem Statement* 📑 + +The p5.js benchmarking suite can report FES validation messages during setup or cleanup without failing the benchmark. In `cpu_transforms.bench.js`, `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference rather than the generated geometry instance. This invalid API usage produced messages while the benchmark continued to report results. After changing the cleanup call to pass the generated `shape` object, isolated WebGL and WebGPU benchmark runs completed without the prior FES messages. This indicates a benchmark-harness defect that should be corrected and used to guide a focused review of related cleanup code. + +--- + +## Proposed Solution* 💡 + +I propose to improve benchmark cleanup validation through the following work: + +- Submit the verified correction to the `freeGeometry()` call in `cpu_transforms.bench.js`. +- Audit related benchmark files that create and release `p5.Geometry` objects for similar API or lifecycle misuse. +- Investigate a maintainer-approved benchmark-specific safeguard that clearly surfaces unexpected FES validation messages during benchmark runs. +- Document a reproducible benchmark command, expected environment, and criteria for a clean benchmark run. + +The exact audit scope and safeguard implementation will be confirmed with the maintainers before implementation. + +--- + +## Research on old issues and Maintainer Patterns* 🔭 + +Issue https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953 documents ongoing work on p5.strands transformation support across graphics backends. Although the proposal does not implement the assigned transformation-matrix work, reliable benchmarks can support broader graphics evaluation. + +I also reviewed Modular FES https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/8887. This refactor moved FES into a dedicated module and introduced a shared `FES` interface for emitting messages, including `log`, `warn`, and `error`. Parameter validation now uses this shared interface to create user-facing diagnostics. + +My benchmark finding reveals an analogous unaddressed situation: invalid API usage can emit an FES validation message while a benchmark still passes. I will not assume that FES messages should globally fail benchmarks. Instead, I will work with maintainers to identify a narrow mechanism that detects unexpected validation output in benchmarks without creating false failures. + +No existing p5.js issue has yet been identified for the benchmark-harness defect described in this proposal. If approved, I will work with maintainers to create or link the appropriate issue before beginning implementation. + +## Impact* 🛠️ + +- [X] **Bug Fix** — Corrects a verified invalid `freeGeometry()` call in `cpu_transforms.bench.js`. +- [X] **Testing** — Makes benchmark validation problems easier to detect and investigate. +- [X] **Contributor Experience** — Provides clear, reproducible instructions for running the affected benchmark. +- [X] **Maintainability** — Reduces the chance that invalid geometry-cleanup usage persists unnoticed in related benchmark code. + +--- + +## Inclusivity and Accessibility 🤝 + +This project has no direct end-user accessibility feature. Clearer diagnostics and reproducible benchmark workflows may indirectly reduce contributor friction by making maintenance work easier to understand and validate. + +--- + +## Implementation Plan* ⏳ + +- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Finalize the proposal, preserve reproduction logs, prepare the one-line fix, and map related benchmark files. +- **Week 6**: Confirm scope with maintainers; decide whether a new issue is needed, and agree on the FES-safeguard approach. +- **Week 7**: Implement the approved fix, focused audit findings, and agreed safeguard, run targeted validation. +- **Week 8**: Submit or refine the PR based on review, add any approved documentation, and prepare the final technical presentation. +--- + +## Deliverables* 📦 + +- A pull request correcting the `cpu_transforms.bench.js` cleanup defect. +- Findings from an agreed, focused audit of related geometry benchmark cleanup. +- A maintainer-approved safeguard or reporting improvement for unexpected FES validation messages in benchmark runs. +- Reproducible benchmark-run instructions in the maintainer-approved documentation location. + +--- + From 2e9316ad323318ca3a9e537312af96ca04b782ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 20:58:23 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 2/7] Refine p5.js benchmark cleanup proposal --- .DS_Store | Bin 6148 -> 0 bytes .idea/.gitignore | 10 ---- .idea/encodings.xml | 4 -- .idea/modules.xml | 8 --- ...l-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml | 8 --- .idea/vcs.xml | 6 -- .../proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 55 ++++++++---------- 7 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 .DS_Store delete mode 100644 .idea/.gitignore delete mode 100644 .idea/encodings.xml delete mode 100644 .idea/modules.xml delete mode 100644 .idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml delete mode 100644 .idea/vcs.xml diff --git a/.DS_Store b/.DS_Store deleted file mode 100644 index 585762a83989a23f088ff6d7ed02f8bab26acc50..0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 GIT binary patch literal 0 HcmV?d00001 literal 6148 zcmeHKJxc>o5S-N%0h=^}<@*V0VSR+8wzwalh#&z?z!2-}{M*icC>|FrEo3&#&U<^i z?{QPyW&zmp@OT9*0L%$zyt|v4KX***q#{Npc*X{M{x;ZQJIOvC@Y-|qIN$*J$Z|JTG1^Z&R=J1HOq{*?kYTlK3YU#WWQVIYrf|5u6Rg}a>k>atUm&-i%bgqg#sVf0vI#^ diff --git a/.idea/.gitignore b/.idea/.gitignore deleted file mode 100644 index 30cf57e..0000000 --- a/.idea/.gitignore +++ /dev/null @@ -1,10 +0,0 @@ -# Default ignored files -/shelf/ -/workspace.xml -# Editor-based HTTP Client requests -/httpRequests/ -# Ignored default folder with query files -/queries/ -# Datasource local storage ignored files -/dataSources/ -/dataSources.local.xml diff --git a/.idea/encodings.xml b/.idea/encodings.xml deleted file mode 100644 index df87cf9..0000000 --- a/.idea/encodings.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,4 +0,0 @@ - - - - \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/.idea/modules.xml b/.idea/modules.xml deleted file mode 100644 index c3de23d..0000000 --- a/.idea/modules.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,8 +0,0 @@ - - - - - - - - \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/.idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml b/.idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml deleted file mode 100644 index c956989..0000000 --- a/.idea/proposal-submission-team-hanagabrielle-sose26.iml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,8 +0,0 @@ - - - - - - - - \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/.idea/vcs.xml b/.idea/vcs.xml deleted file mode 100644 index 35eb1dd..0000000 --- a/.idea/vcs.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,6 +0,0 @@ - - - - - - \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md index b40376f..beea312 100644 --- a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -16,80 +16,75 @@ ## p5.js Issue* 📋 -- **Related graphics context:** https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953 +- **Link to the issue:** https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041 -- Issue Title: Support transformation matrices in p5.strands +- Issue Title: Benchmark cleanup passes `p5.model` to `freeGeometry` -- Repository: https://github.com/processing/p5.js - -**Proposal status**: This benchmark-reliability proposal is independent of #8953’s assigned transformation-matrix work. I am requesting maintainer approval for this direction; if approved, I will work with maintainers to create or link the appropriate p5.js issue before implementation. +- Repository: p5.js --- ## Abstract* 📝 -My proposal focuses on improving the reliability of the p5.js benchmarking suite. During local testing, I identified a reproducible defect in benchmark cleanup that emitted Friendly Error System (FES) validation messages while the benchmark still passed. I propose a focused audit of related geometry cleanup code, a maintainer-approved safeguard for unexpected validation messages, and reproducible benchmark guidance. The goal is to improve the diagnostic quality and maintainability of benchmark runs. +My proposal fixes a reproducible benchmark-cleanup defect in p5.js. During local testing, I found that `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference instead of the geometry instance created by `buildGeometry()`, emitting a Friendly Error System (FES) validation message while the benchmark continued. The scoped change passes the generated `shape` instance to `freeGeometry()` and is verified through the affected benchmark. This work corrects invalid cleanup usage without changing p5.js or FES behavior more broadly. --- ## Problem Statement* 📑 -The p5.js benchmarking suite can report FES validation messages during setup or cleanup without failing the benchmark. In `cpu_transforms.bench.js`, `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference rather than the generated geometry instance. This invalid API usage produced messages while the benchmark continued to report results. After changing the cleanup call to pass the generated `shape` object, isolated WebGL and WebGPU benchmark runs completed without the prior FES messages. This indicates a benchmark-harness defect that should be corrected and used to guide a focused review of related cleanup code. +In `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`, the cleanup call passed `myp5.model`—a function reference—to `freeGeometry()` rather than the `shape` geometry instance. This invalid API usage emitted an FES validation message while the benchmark continued to report results. Passing `shape` instead removes the observed message in isolated WebGL and WebGPU benchmark runs. Contributors and maintainers need the benchmark to execute its intended cleanup call correctly while evaluating CPU-transform behavior. --- ## Proposed Solution* 💡 -I propose to improve benchmark cleanup validation through the following work: +I will submit the verified one-line correction in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`: -- Submit the verified correction to the `freeGeometry()` call in `cpu_transforms.bench.js`. -- Audit related benchmark files that create and release `p5.Geometry` objects for similar API or lifecycle misuse. -- Investigate a maintainer-approved benchmark-specific safeguard that clearly surfaces unexpected FES validation messages during benchmark runs. -- Document a reproducible benchmark command, expected environment, and criteria for a clean benchmark run. +```js +myp5.freeGeometry(shape); +``` -The exact audit scope and safeguard implementation will be confirmed with the maintainers before implementation. +I will run the targeted CPU-transforms benchmark in its WebGL and WebGPU configurations before submitting the pull request. This narrow approach directly corrects the reported defect and follows the maintainer’s request to create Issue #9041 before opening a PR. --- ## Research on old issues and Maintainer Patterns* 🔭 -Issue https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953 documents ongoing work on p5.strands transformation support across graphics backends. Although the proposal does not implement the assigned transformation-matrix work, reliable benchmarks can support broader graphics evaluation. - -I also reviewed Modular FES https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/8887. This refactor moved FES into a dedicated module and introduced a shared `FES` interface for emitting messages, including `log`, `warn`, and `error`. Parameter validation now uses this shared interface to create user-facing diagnostics. +Issue https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953 documents ongoing work on p5.strands transformation support across graphics backends. It is relevant background for the project’s graphics direction, but this proposal does not implement its assigned transformation-matrix work. -My benchmark finding reveals an analogous unaddressed situation: invalid API usage can emit an FES validation message while a benchmark still passes. I will not assume that FES messages should globally fail benchmarks. Instead, I will work with maintainers to identify a narrow mechanism that detects unexpected validation output in benchmarks without creating false failures. +I also reviewed https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/8887, which modularized the Friendly Error System. My benchmark finding shows that invalid API usage can emit an FES validation message while a benchmark still passes. I will not assume that all FES messages should globally fail benchmarks; this proposal corrects the specific misuse tracked in https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041. -No existing p5.js issue has yet been identified for the benchmark-harness defect described in this proposal. If approved, I will work with maintainers to create or link the appropriate issue before beginning implementation. +--- ## Impact* 🛠️ - [X] **Bug Fix** — Corrects a verified invalid `freeGeometry()` call in `cpu_transforms.bench.js`. -- [X] **Testing** — Makes benchmark validation problems easier to detect and investigate. -- [X] **Contributor Experience** — Provides clear, reproducible instructions for running the affected benchmark. -- [X] **Maintainability** — Reduces the chance that invalid geometry-cleanup usage persists unnoticed in related benchmark code. +- [X] **Testing** — Verifies the correction through the affected WebGL and WebGPU benchmark runs. --- ## Inclusivity and Accessibility 🤝 -This project has no direct end-user accessibility feature. Clearer diagnostics and reproducible benchmark workflows may indirectly reduce contributor friction by making maintenance work easier to understand and validate. +Not applicable — bug fix. --- ## Implementation Plan* ⏳ -- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Finalize the proposal, preserve reproduction logs, prepare the one-line fix, and map related benchmark files. -- **Week 6**: Confirm scope with maintainers; decide whether a new issue is needed, and agree on the FES-safeguard approach. -- **Week 7**: Implement the approved fix, focused audit findings, and agreed safeguard, run targeted validation. -- **Week 8**: Submit or refine the PR based on review, add any approved documentation, and prepare the final technical presentation. +- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Reproduce the benchmark message, identify the incorrect argument, and prepare the one-line correction. +- **Week 6 (Completed)**: Discuss the finding with @davepagurek and create Issue #9041 as requested. +- **Week 7**: Create the focused pull request, run the targeted WebGL and WebGPU benchmark validation, and request review. +- **Week 8**: Respond to review feedback and document the result in the final technical presentation. + --- ## Deliverables* 📦 -- A pull request correcting the `cpu_transforms.bench.js` cleanup defect. -- Findings from an agreed, focused audit of related geometry benchmark cleanup. -- A maintainer-approved safeguard or reporting improvement for unexpected FES validation messages in benchmark runs. -- Reproducible benchmark-run instructions in the maintainer-approved documentation location. +- A pull request correcting the cleanup call in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`. +- Targeted benchmark results for the WebGL and WebGPU configurations showing that the prior FES message no longer appears. --- +## Anything Else? + +I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue #9041. The implementation is intentionally limited to the maintainer-confirmed correction. From 0720ecb7bb7f6bd1faa56d623fb4fed4f0a84429 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 10:21:46 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 3/7] Update proposal after p5.js fix merge --- .../proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 17 +++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md index beea312..4479f5d 100644 --- a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ ## Abstract* 📝 -My proposal fixes a reproducible benchmark-cleanup defect in p5.js. During local testing, I found that `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference instead of the geometry instance created by `buildGeometry()`, emitting a Friendly Error System (FES) validation message while the benchmark continued. The scoped change passes the generated `shape` instance to `freeGeometry()` and is verified through the affected benchmark. This work corrects invalid cleanup usage without changing p5.js or FES behavior more broadly. +My proposal fixes a reproducible benchmark-cleanup defect in p5.js. During local testing, I found that `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference instead of the geometry instance created by `buildGeometry()`, emitting a Friendly Error System (FES) validation message while the benchmark continued. The scoped change passes the generated `shape` instance to `freeGeometry()` and is verified through the affected benchmark. PR #9071 was reviewed and merged by p5.js maintainer Dave Pagurek. --- @@ -38,13 +38,13 @@ In `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`, the cleanup call passed `myp5.model`— ## Proposed Solution* 💡 -I will submit the verified one-line correction in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`: +I submitted the verified one-line correction in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`: ```js myp5.freeGeometry(shape); ``` -I will run the targeted CPU-transforms benchmark in its WebGL and WebGPU configurations before submitting the pull request. This narrow approach directly corrects the reported defect and follows the maintainer’s request to create Issue #9041 before opening a PR. +I validated the change by running the targeted CPU-transforms benchmark in its WebGL and WebGPU configurations, confirming that the prior FES validation message no longer appeared. This narrow approach directly corrected the reported defect and follows the maintainer’s request to create Issue #9041 before opening a PR. --- @@ -71,20 +71,21 @@ Not applicable — bug fix. ## Implementation Plan* ⏳ -- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Reproduce the benchmark message, identify the incorrect argument, and prepare the one-line correction. +- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Reproduced the benchmark message, identify the incorrect argument, and prepare the one-line correction. - **Week 6 (Completed)**: Discuss the finding with @davepagurek and create Issue #9041 as requested. -- **Week 7**: Create the focused pull request, run the targeted WebGL and WebGPU benchmark validation, and request review. -- **Week 8**: Respond to review feedback and document the result in the final technical presentation. +- **Week 7 (Completed)**: Submitted PR #9071, ran targeted WebGL/WebGPU benchmark validation, and received maintainer review. +- **Week 8**: Document the merged result in the final technical presentation and update portfolio materials. --- ## Deliverables* 📦 -- A pull request correcting the cleanup call in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`. +- Merged PR #9071 correcting the cleanup call in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`. - Targeted benchmark results for the WebGL and WebGPU configurations showing that the prior FES message no longer appears. +- Public Issue #9041 documenting the benchmark-cleanup defect. --- ## Anything Else? -I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue #9041. The implementation is intentionally limited to the maintainer-confirmed correction. +I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue #9041. Dave confirmed that `shape` was the correct argument, reviewed PR #9071, commented “Thanks for the update, looks good!”, and merged the fix into `processing:main`. From d56dec0574c5be14e4386e30e63f13d422740f11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 11:50:44 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 4/7] Update proposal after p5.js fix merge --- Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md index 4479f5d..f4c7ace 100644 --- a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -88,4 +88,4 @@ Not applicable — bug fix. ## Anything Else? -I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue #9041. Dave confirmed that `shape` was the correct argument, reviewed PR #9071, commented “Thanks for the update, looks good!”, and merged the fix into `processing:main`. +I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue #9041. Dave Pagurek confirmed that `shape` was the correct argument, reviewed PR #9071, commented “Thanks for the update, looks good!”, and merged the fix into `processing:main`. After the merge, Dave also requested contributor credit through the all-contributors bot, and PR #9075 added @Danyccsf to the p5.js contributors list for testing. From 16d3711b43b5d0b9e7bb42fad57d19c25412b3fa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 21:17:18 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 5/7] Update proposal after p5.js PR merge --- Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md index f4c7ace..3f975e4 100644 --- a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ I submitted the verified one-line correction in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench myp5.freeGeometry(shape); ``` -I validated the change by running the targeted CPU-transforms benchmark in its WebGL and WebGPU configurations, confirming that the prior FES validation message no longer appeared. This narrow approach directly corrected the reported defect and follows the maintainer’s request to create Issue #9041 before opening a PR. +I validated the change by running the targeted CPU-transforms benchmark in its WebGL and WebGPU configurations, confirming that the prior FES validation message no longer appeared. This narrow approach directly corrected the reported defect and followed the maintainer’s request to create Issue #9041 before opening a PR. --- @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ Not applicable — bug fix. ## Implementation Plan* ⏳ - **Week 5 (Completed)**: Reproduced the benchmark message, identify the incorrect argument, and prepare the one-line correction. -- **Week 6 (Completed)**: Discuss the finding with @davepagurek and create Issue #9041 as requested. +- **Week 6 (Completed)**: Discussed the finding with @davepagurek and create Issue #9041 as requested. - **Week 7 (Completed)**: Submitted PR #9071, ran targeted WebGL/WebGPU benchmark validation, and received maintainer review. - **Week 8**: Document the merged result in the final technical presentation and update portfolio materials. From 2c2dfe09aab4666c35e50b18f72eddaf93a416e2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 21:37:51 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 6/7] Update proposal after p5.js PR merge --- .../proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md index 3f975e4..4a89c47 100644 --- a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -50,9 +50,9 @@ I validated the change by running the targeted CPU-transforms benchmark in its W ## Research on old issues and Maintainer Patterns* 🔭 -Issue https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953 documents ongoing work on p5.strands transformation support across graphics backends. It is relevant background for the project’s graphics direction, but this proposal does not implement its assigned transformation-matrix work. +Issue [#8953](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/8953) documents ongoing work on p5.strands transformation support across graphics backends. It is relevant background for the project’s graphics direction, but this proposal does not implement its assigned transformation-matrix work. -I also reviewed https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/8887, which modularized the Friendly Error System. My benchmark finding shows that invalid API usage can emit an FES validation message while a benchmark still passes. I will not assume that all FES messages should globally fail benchmarks; this proposal corrects the specific misuse tracked in https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041. +I also reviewed [#8887](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/8887), which modularized the Friendly Error System. My benchmark finding shows that invalid API usage can emit an FES validation message while a benchmark still passes. I will not assume that all FES messages should globally fail benchmarks; this proposal corrects the specific misuse tracked in [#9041](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041). --- @@ -71,21 +71,21 @@ Not applicable — bug fix. ## Implementation Plan* ⏳ -- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Reproduced the benchmark message, identify the incorrect argument, and prepare the one-line correction. -- **Week 6 (Completed)**: Discussed the finding with @davepagurek and create Issue #9041 as requested. -- **Week 7 (Completed)**: Submitted PR #9071, ran targeted WebGL/WebGPU benchmark validation, and received maintainer review. +- **Week 5 (Completed)**: Reproduced the benchmark message, identified the incorrect argument, and prepared the one-line correction. +- **Week 6 (Completed)**: Discussed the finding with @davepagurek and created Issue [#9041](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041) as requested. +- **Week 7 (Completed)**: Submitted PR [#9071](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/9071), ran targeted WebGL/WebGPU benchmark validation, and received maintainer review. - **Week 8**: Document the merged result in the final technical presentation and update portfolio materials. --- ## Deliverables* 📦 -- Merged PR #9071 correcting the cleanup call in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`. +- Merged PR [#9071](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/9071) correcting the cleanup call in `test/bench/cpu_transforms.bench.js`. - Targeted benchmark results for the WebGL and WebGPU configurations showing that the prior FES message no longer appears. -- Public Issue #9041 documenting the benchmark-cleanup defect. +- Public Issue [#9041](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041) documenting the benchmark-cleanup defect. --- ## Anything Else? -I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue #9041. Dave Pagurek confirmed that `shape` was the correct argument, reviewed PR #9071, commented “Thanks for the update, looks good!”, and merged the fix into `processing:main`. After the merge, Dave also requested contributor credit through the all-contributors bot, and PR #9075 added @Danyccsf to the p5.js contributors list for testing. +I discussed the finding with @davepagurek in the p5.js Discord before opening Issue [#9041](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041). Dave Pagurek confirmed that `shape` was the correct argument, reviewed PR [#9071](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/9071), commented “Thanks for the update, looks good!”, and merged the fix into `processing:main`. After the merge, Dave also requested contributor credit through the all-contributors bot, and PR [#9075](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/9075) added @Danyccsf to the p5.js contributors list for testing. From 1a90c199faf6649f0282de3a7f1d67ba3205793b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dany Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 21:50:34 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 7/7] Update proposal after p5.js PR merge --- Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md index 4a89c47..9d3958a 100644 --- a/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md +++ b/Submissions_SOSE_2026/proposal-team-hanagabrielle.md @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ ## p5.js Issue* 📋 -- **Link to the issue:** https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041 +- **Link to the issue:** [#9041](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/issues/9041) - Issue Title: Benchmark cleanup passes `p5.model` to `freeGeometry` @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ ## Abstract* 📝 -My proposal fixes a reproducible benchmark-cleanup defect in p5.js. During local testing, I found that `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference instead of the geometry instance created by `buildGeometry()`, emitting a Friendly Error System (FES) validation message while the benchmark continued. The scoped change passes the generated `shape` instance to `freeGeometry()` and is verified through the affected benchmark. PR #9071 was reviewed and merged by p5.js maintainer Dave Pagurek. +My proposal fixes a reproducible benchmark-cleanup defect in p5.js. During local testing, I found that `freeGeometry()` received the `myp5.model` function reference instead of the geometry instance created by `buildGeometry()`, emitting a Friendly Error System (FES) validation message while the benchmark continued. The scoped change passes the generated `shape` instance to `freeGeometry()` and is verified through the affected benchmark. PR [#9071](https://github.com/processing/p5.js/pull/9071) was reviewed and merged by p5.js maintainer Dave Pagurek. ---