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

Fix for issue #905, replicating the PR #906 #990

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kishore-nori
Copy link
Collaborator

Due to some rebasing mess up from my side, I am replicating the PR (#906, which I closed to clean up the history). The changes in this PR and related tests, fix and isolate the issue #905.

cc @amartinhuertas

@kishore-nori kishore-nori self-assigned this Apr 5, 2024
@kishore-nori
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I just realised that this PR is related to the recently merged PR #987. The approaches to deal with the issue are different PR #987, makes things work for equivalent CellPoints and this one fixes the problem that get_cell_points generates a different object (which probably is not good?) by returning identical CellPoint objects, thereby fixing the cause of the issue, which breaks

function evaluate!(cache,f::CellState,x::CellPoint)
  if f.points === x
    f.values
  else
    @unreachable """\n
    It is not possible to evaluate the given CellState on the given CellPoint.

    a CellState can only be evaluated at the CellPoint it was created from.
    If you want to evaluate at another location, you would need first to project the CellState
    to a FESpace (e.g. via a L2 projection).
    """
  end
end

changed to f.points == x in PR #987, I feel both ways are required..

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Apr 5, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.23%. Comparing base (e597b09) to head (2fd1fc4).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #990   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.23%   88.23%           
=======================================
  Files         179      179           
  Lines       22593    22593           
=======================================
  Hits        19936    19936           
  Misses       2657     2657           

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

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.

2 participants