Skip to content

docs: correct README's ScopedValue claims (not actually used)#121

Merged
eschizoid merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/readme-scopedvalue-correction
May 16, 2026
Merged

docs: correct README's ScopedValue claims (not actually used)#121
eschizoid merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/readme-scopedvalue-correction

Conversation

@eschizoid

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

CLAUDE.md §3 already records that ScopedValue is not in use in the codebase — the earlier per-format SerDe caches were torn out. The README still claimed otherwise in three places. Rewrite each to describe the actual state.

Changes

Location Was Now
Architecture intro (~L323) "virtual threads, scoped values, records, JPMS" "virtual threads, sealed types, records, JPMS"
Concurrency section (~L388) "Heavy objects … are reused via ScopedValue …" "No ThreadLocal on the hot path. If thread-local-like state is needed later, reach for ScopedValue; the codebase currently has neither."
Thread-safety / resource section (~L1234) "KPipe reuses heavy resources via ScopedValue …" "Don't add ThreadLocal … reach for ScopedValue if such state is ever introduced."

A grep against lib/**/*.java confirms zero usages of ScopedValue. The remaining two mentions in the README are now future-tense ("reach for ScopedValue") and accurate.

Test plan

  • No ScopedValue import or reference in production code (verified via grep -r "ScopedValue" lib/)
  • CLAUDE.md §3 wording matches the corrected README

CLAUDE.md §3 already records that ScopedValue is not currently used in
the codebase — the earlier per-format SerDe caches were torn out. The
README still made the present-tense claim in three places (the Java 25
features lede, the concurrency section's heavy-object-reuse bullet, and
the thread-safety guidance). Rewrite each to describe the actual state:
no ThreadLocal on the hot path because it doesn't compose with
thread-per-record, and ScopedValue is the future-tense option if such
state is ever introduced.
@eschizoid eschizoid merged commit d95fded into main May 16, 2026
2 checks passed
@eschizoid eschizoid deleted the docs/readme-scopedvalue-correction branch May 16, 2026 14:11
@codecov

codecov Bot commented May 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 70.68%. Comparing base (71f99f3) to head (e847108).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main     #121   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     70.68%   70.68%           
  Complexity      623      623           
=========================================
  Files            68       68           
  Lines          2521     2521           
  Branches        323      323           
=========================================
  Hits           1782     1782           
  Misses          575      575           
  Partials        164      164           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant