Dev kwargs

[ralfbanisch]

Merge this with dev at your pleasure.

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #10 into dev will increase coverage by 0.01%. The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev      #10      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   95.61%   95.63%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files           8        8              
  Lines         456      458       +2     
  Branches       24       25       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits          436      438       +2     
  Misses         10       10              
  Partials       10       10

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/pydiffmap/diffusion_map.py	93.18% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:
tests/test_kernel.py	100% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:
src/pydiffmap/kernel.py	83.33% <100%> (+0.57%)	:arrow_up:

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update b9e4e20...1652cc8. Read the comment docs.

[ralfbanisch]

I’m slowly getting the hang of it ;-)

In the future, do you think we should always assign reviewers to our pull requests or just go ahead and merge them if git gives the green light?

On 29. Nov 2017, at 16:26, Erik Henning Thiede notifications@github.com wrote:

@ehthiede approved this pull request.

Wow, this looks really great! Thanks for putting this work in, Ralf. Also, I didn't know know about the review feature: I'll start using it when merging my branches into dev in the future.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DiffusionMapsAcademics/pyDiffMap/pull/10#pullrequestreview-79884971, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ARuMPj63UBDKGn1AdFcDx4yXbXrW8RfRks5s7Xe-gaJpZM4Qupkf.

[ralfbanisch]

I merged. Should we delete the dev_kwargs branch or keep it?

[ehthiede]

I suppose we can leave it up to individual discretion, based on how complex / disruptive the commit is. It's probably overkill for small commits, but maybe we can use it just for big changes / changes to the interface (under-the-hood tweaks and bugfixes.

I do like it because it gives me a better sense of what is going on with the codebase, which should hopefully help me avoid merge conflicts in the future. Also, since in practice most of us will be running our codes on the dev branch, this prevents us from accidentally breaking each others code's without forewarning (hopefully).