Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat: add new begin_at_strategy argument and split dataset_obj() #210

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kakhahmed
Copy link
Collaborator

@kakhahmed kakhahmed commented Jul 30, 2024

I am considering this as a Draft until the pycalibration MR is fully reviewed

  • Expose begin_at_strategy calcat argument to switch between prior and closest strategies
  • Split dataset_obj() deriving path part to different function, as it can be usefull to use externally

This MR is related to an already almost available change in pycalibration:https://git.xfel.eu/calibration/pycalibration/-/merge_requests/1035/

This is related to that issue as well : https://git.xfel.eu/calibration/planning/-/issues/200 of adding begin_at_strategy to calibration_constant_versions/get_by_detector_conditions API

ahmedk added 2 commits July 30, 2024 11:27
- Expose new `begin_at_strategy` calcat argument to switch between closest and prior strategies
- Split dataset_obj() deriving path part, as it can be useful to use externally as well.
@kakhahmed kakhahmed force-pushed the feat/begin_at_strategy branch 2 times, most recently from 583a412 to 07f9cc1 Compare July 30, 2024 09:51
@kakhahmed kakhahmed changed the title feat: add new begin_at_strategy argument and split dataset_obj() Draft: feat: add new begin_at_strategy argument and split dataset_obj() Jul 30, 2024
@kakhahmed kakhahmed marked this pull request as draft July 30, 2024 09:53
@kakhahmed kakhahmed changed the title Draft: feat: add new begin_at_strategy argument and split dataset_obj() feat: add new begin_at_strategy argument and split dataset_obj() Jul 30, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 30, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.06%. Comparing base (9e7914f) to head (9d1182a).
Report is 50 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/extra/calibration.py 66.66% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #210      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   71.07%   71.06%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          23       23              
  Lines        2724     2730       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits         1936     1940       +4     
- Misses        788      790       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@kakhahmed
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This MR is ready to review from my side. The coverage tests are a bit rough on me :(

I see that there are no SingleConstant test methods, therefore I didnt try adding tests for the new file_path method

@kakhahmed kakhahmed marked this pull request as ready for review August 1, 2024 07:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant