Closed jishnub closed 1 year ago
Merging #333 (79e70d0) into master (0929e07) will not change coverage. The diff coverage is
100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #333 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.67% 98.67%
=======================================
Files 5 5
Lines 452 452
=======================================
Hits 446 446
Misses 6 6
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/OffsetArrays.jl | 98.29% <100.00%> (ø) |
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
The only potential problem with that is that Tuple{} <: Tuple{Vararg{T}}
. Do we have a test for a 0d reshape?
Yes, I have added a test for that in this PR. That works because Base
defines reshape for Tuple{Vararg{Int}}
, which is more specific than Tuple{Vararg{OffsetAxis}}
.
Shoot, I missed that. Thanks for doing this! This is subtle design and you've clearly mastered it.
Test failure on v1.0 is due to https://github.com/JuliaMath/IntegerMathUtils.jl/issues/5, and would hopefully be fixed by https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/pull/86557
Since this method is meant to be a fallback, this should be less specific than other methods in both the array type and the axis type. This fixes an ambiguity error while using
OffsetArrays
andFillArrays
together:After this PR