CodecBuilder: use level for Gzip and Zstd codecs#69
Merged
brokkoli71 merged 1 commit intozarr-developers:mainfrom Mar 31, 2026
Merged
CodecBuilder: use level for Gzip and Zstd codecs#69brokkoli71 merged 1 commit intozarr-developers:mainfrom
brokkoli71 merged 1 commit intozarr-developers:mainfrom
Conversation
While the blosc codec uses clevel internally, the gzip and zstd codec use level. This updates the signature of the CodecBuilder API to be consistent with GzipConfiguration and ZstdConfiguration.
normanrz
approved these changes
Mar 27, 2026
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
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Discovered during the review of glencoesoftware/bioformats2raw#311
While the blosc codec uses
clevelinternally, the gzip and zstd codec uselevel. This updates the signatures in the CodecBuilder API to be consistent with GzipConfiguration and ZstdConfiguration.There is no functional change associated with this PR and tests should keep passing as expected.