[Refactor] rename set_index_k_and_scale_buffer to set_index_k_scale_b…

[edwingao28]

Motivation

The method name set_index_k_and_scale_buffer was inconsistent with get_index_k_scale_continuous and other similar methods. This change renames it to set_index_k_scale_buffer for naming consistency.

Modifications

• Renamed set_index_k_and_scale_buffer → set_index_k_scale_buffer
• Updated 2 call sites in nsa_indexer.py
• Removed outdated TODO comment

Accuracy Tests

No functional changes — only refactor/rename. Verified all references updated.

Checklist

• Format your code according to the Format code with pre-commit.
• Add unit tests according to the Run and add unit tests.
• Update documentation according to Write documentations.
• Provide accuracy and speed benchmark results according to Test the accuracy and Benchmark the speed.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @edwingao28, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on a minor refactoring to enhance code consistency and readability. It renames a method to align its naming convention with similar functions, ensuring a more uniform API. The change is purely cosmetic and does not introduce any functional modifications, ensuring no impact on existing behavior or performance.

Highlights

• Method Renaming: The method set_index_k_and_scale_buffer has been renamed to set_index_k_scale_buffer for improved naming consistency across the codebase.
• Call Site Updates: Two call sites within nsa_indexer.py have been updated to reflect the new method name.
• Code Cleanup: An outdated TODO comment related to the method renaming has been removed from memory_pool.py.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors a method name from set_index_k_and_scale_buffer to set_index_k_scale_buffer for consistency, updating its definition and two call sites. While the change is implemented correctly, I have raised a concern that the new name is less descriptive than the original. The old name clearly indicated that both k and its scale are set, whereas the new name is more ambiguous. I've suggested reverting to the original name to improve code clarity and maintainability.

[gemini-code-assist]

While the goal of achieving naming consistency is good, this change may introduce a different kind of inconsistency. The new name set_index_k_scale_buffer is intended to be consistent with get_index_k_scale_continuous. However, get_index_k_scale_continuous only retrieves the scale component, while this function sets both index_k and index_k_scale.

The original name set_index_k_and_scale_buffer was more explicit about setting two distinct components. The new name is more ambiguous and less descriptive of the function's behavior.

For better clarity and long-term maintainability, I'd suggest using a name that clearly indicates that both K and its scale are being set. Reverting to the original name seems like a good option.

Suggested change

	def set_index_k_scale_buffer(
	def set_index_k_and_scale_buffer(