refactor: drop property_tree dependency - #547
Open
Becheler wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
|
Boost dependency footprint vs Header-inclusion weights (graph files pulling each direct dependency in):
Transitive Boost modules: 68 → 67 (-1)
|
|
Compiler-warning counts vs
|
Becheler
force-pushed
the
refactor/drop-property-tree-dependency
branch
from
August 6, 2026 05:51
dd803bf to
8d16ad5
Compare
Becheler
force-pushed
the
refactor/drop-property-tree-dependency
branch
from
August 6, 2026 05:56
8d16ad5 to
520413c
Compare
Becheler
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 6, 2026 09:12
Becheler
force-pushed
the
refactor/drop-property-tree-dependency
branch
from
August 7, 2026 19:18
520413c to
16aca6d
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
❌ Your patch check has failed because the patch coverage (86.66%) is below the target coverage (100.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Becheler
force-pushed
the
refactor/drop-property-tree-dependency
branch
from
August 11, 2026 07:18
16aca6d to
222f7e6
Compare
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Before submitting
developbranch.Type of change
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
What this PR does
Motivation
property_tree's value is a uniform generic tree with a string-path query API, the same interface we would use for JSON or INI. But GraphML never needs that generality: it only ever asks "tag name? this attribute? this text?", which a rapidxml node answers directly.
Under the hood, property_tree already parses XML with rapidxml (nodes are non owning, pointers to buffer), then copies the entire parse result into its generic ptree so the uniform API works (pure overhead with many allocations as nodes are recursive pairs
string/ptree).This PR keeps the exact same rapidxml parser but walks its DOM directly, deleting the ptree copy (and with it the property_tree dependency).
Testing
The legacy tests properly exercise the round trip and code path to guarantee no regression. The only legacy behavior we can't match is the exception type being raised. Malformed XML now throws
boost::parse_errorinstead of property_tree'sxml_parser_error/ptree_bad_pathBenchmark script to compile and run on develop then on the PR branch:
On develop:
On PR:
Checklist
b2in thetest/directory).