Closed EngineerDanny closed 2 years ago
thanks for sharing. not sure what the problem with that plot is.
This was the data set generated when the function was ran. 👉 time_frame.csv
Yes, there are actually several commits on that branch. But the plot_branchmetrics function works differently as explained here.
Master : It only tests the latest commit in this branch .In this case, it is Merge pull request... commit.
PR Branch : It tests all the commits in this branch after the latest common commit among the two branches. In this case, it is checks ok commit.
This explains why there are only two commits on the X-axis.
This is how the commit history looks for the master and l1loss branches respectively.
there were 42 commits in the corresponding PR, which was already merged with master. https://github.com/tdhock/binsegRcpp/pull/10/commits maybe you need to refer to the explicit commit SHA1 IDs to get a time series of 42 commits?
Yh. It looks like it squashed the 42 commits into just one merge request commit and used that.
@tdhock I have been looking into this, when the test_names are many. This means there are lots of testthat blocks in just one file. Hence a longer graph output.
@tdhock The new update exposes vital parameters like the height_in_inches
and width_in_inches
.
Do you think I should expose res
too ?
yes that could be useful
After, running the
Rperform::plot_branchmetrics(test_path = "tests/testthat/test-CRAN.R", metric = "time", branch1 = "l1loss", branch2 = "master", save_data = T, save_plots = F)
function on the binsegRcpp repository, comparing the master and l1loss branch. I recorded a time_frame of 254 observations and 8 variables. Below is how the graph looks like :You could see that information is not depicted clearly on the graph. My hypothesis is that it was caused as a result of the larger data set. Potential fix will be breaking down the data sets and plotting their respective graphs.