read_file dedup stub bypassing repeated-read loop detection
Cluster 15759. Data as of
Nothing open on GitHub. Fix merged in #16382 on 27 Apr 2026. Check it covers your case.
The short answer
- Known?
- Yes. 3 related items grouped here, 1 issue already closed.
- Fix event
- A fix was merged to main in PR #16382. Check it covers your case. No release data is tracked.
- Tracker
- The maintainers' tracker marks this
resolved, deciding PR #16382. That is separate from the fix event. - Still open
- Nothing open on GitHub.
All three members concern read_file's dedup early-return/stub path not feeding into loop detection, which is reported as allowing an endless read loop. One is a bug report and two are pull requests proposing changes, including escalating to BLOCKED on repeated stubs; their outcomes are not stated in the titles.
Open issues0
Open PRs0
Fixes on record
-
#16382 fix(file-tools): escalate to BLOCKED on repeated read_file dedup stubs
files:
tests/tools/test_file_read_guards.py,tools/file_tools.py
1 PR closed without merging
From the close comments: superseded by another PR 1
-
#15762 fix(tools): dedup early-return bypasses loop detection in read_file (#15759) · superseded by another PR →
a32b325,977d5f5,ced8f44,#16382,#15759
Closed issues · 1
- Closed#15759[Bug]: read_file dedup stub never triggers loop detection — infinite read loop
How this cluster was grouped
-
Link evidence (
structural links throughout): every member is connected by structural evidence: shared changed files, or a closing/superseded reference. -
Pairwise link density
0.67: the share of item pairs that carry a link, counting a structural link in full and a relevance-only link at 0.36.1.00means every pair is linked.
Pick up a Lab task
Check whether a fix covers the open issues here, with your own agent. Bring back evidence for maintainers.
Open the LabAt a glance
- Merged PRs
- #16382
- Closed issues
- 1
- Attempts
- 1 PR closed without merging
- Fix link checked
- 27 Apr 2026. This confirmation is old and may be out of date (a revert or reopen would not have invalidated it here); re-verify.