Files
mxaccess/design
Joseph Doherty f2f22dfcd1
rust / build / test / clippy / fmt (push) Has been cancelled
[F26 stream] mxaccess: AsbSession::subscribe — Stream<Item = MonitoredItemValue>
Closes the last F26 stub from the M5 status block. New
AsbSession::subscribe(subscription_id) returns an AsbSubscription
that impls Stream<Item = Result<MonitoredItemValue, Error>>. An
internal tokio::spawn'd publish-loop drains the subscription queue
via the existing AsbSession::publish() and fans each
PublishResponse's `values` array out as individual stream items.

Termination semantics:
  - Drop of AsbSubscription calls JoinHandle::abort() — the publish
    task stops draining the server-side queue (the .NET reference
    pattern at MxAsbDataClient.cs uses the same task-cancellation
    shape).
  - Transport error from publish() is delivered as the final stream
    item; the loop returns and the channel closes.
  - Receiver-drop (consumer stops polling) is detected when
    tx.send returns Err — the loop exits without making more
    publish calls.

The inner publish_loop helper takes any FnMut() -> Future<Result<...>>
so it's testable in isolation (no live ASB endpoint required).

Per-item ItemStatus from the server is intentionally not surfaced
on the stream: the field is opaque per-item and rarely actionable
for the streaming consumer. A richer struct can wrap each value if
that need surfaces.

3 new tests pin:
  - asb_subscription_is_stream_send_unpin (compile-time bounds);
  - publish_loop_delivers_values_then_terminates_on_error
    (3 Ok values from 2 batches, then 1 terminal Err);
  - publish_loop_exits_when_consumer_drops_channel.

New deps used (already in mxaccess Cargo.toml): futures_util::Stream,
tokio::sync::mpsc, tokio_stream::wrappers::ReceiverStream,
tokio::task::JoinHandle.

Workspace: 718 → 721 tests. Default-feature clippy clean.
mxaccess crate-level doc updated to drop the "stubbed for next F26
iteration" note for the subscription stream.

design/followups.md F18 M5 status block updated: F26 stream
subscription marked resolved.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-06 01:10:22 -04:00
..

design/ — Rust port architectural plan

This folder is the design contract for the Rust replacement of AVEVA/Wonderware MXAccess. It is the gap between the .NET reference in src/ and the Rust crates that will be written under a sibling rust/ workspace (per CLAUDE.md).

The folder is structured as a small set of focused documents. Read in order; each builds on the previous.

File Purpose
00-overview.md Mission, two-layer goal, architectural principles, non-goals
10-raw-layer.md Byte-accurate raw MXAccess layer (codec + transport + session)
20-async-layer.md Idiomatic Tokio async layer on top of the raw layer
30-crate-topology.md Cargo workspace, crates, dependencies, build/test commands
40-protocol-invariants.md Bill of materials: IIDs, opnums, envelope/handle bytes
50-error-model.md MxStatus, error types, panic/cancellation policy
60-roadmap.md Milestones M0..M6, validation strategy
70-risks-and-open-questions.md Parity gaps, unproven flows, cross-platform constraints
dependencies.md Cross- and within-milestone parallelism map; agent budget per phase
review.md Adversarial review log (BLOCKER/MAJOR/MINOR/NIT findings, all resolved)
prompt.md /loop driver prompt for autonomous M2M6 execution
followups.md Open / resolved deferred work items; auto-triaged by prompt.md Step 0 (created on first /loop run if missing)

The design is grounded in the .NET reference at src/ and the protocol artifacts in docs/, analysis/, and captures/. Do not introduce protocol behavior in these documents that is not already proven in the reference. When adding a new claim about wire format, cite either:

  • a .cs file path in src/MxNativeCodec/, src/MxNativeClient/, or src/MxAsbClient/, or
  • a docs/*.md spec file, or
  • a captures/0NN-frida-* directory or analysis/frida/*.tsv row.

This folder is documentation, not code. When the Rust workspace is created, the design here is the contract it must satisfy. When evidence in captures/ invalidates a design decision here, update the design first, then the code.

Reading order

  • New contributor: 00 → 30 → 10 → 40 → 20 → 50 → 60 → 70.
  • Protocol question: 40 first, then the relevant section of 10.
  • API question: 20 first, then 50.
  • Planning a milestone: 60 first, cross-reference 70 for blockers.
  • Scheduling concurrent work: dependencies.md for the per-phase parallelism map.
  • Driving M2M6 autonomously via /loop: prompt.md (and the followups.md triage log it maintains).