Closed daniel-mohr closed 2 years ago
Merging #37 (41b4392) into master (5e819a2) will not change coverage. The diff coverage is
n/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #37 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 81.10% 81.10%
=======================================
Files 2 2
Lines 677 677
=======================================
Hits 549 549
Misses 128 128
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
unittests | 81.10% <ø> (ø) |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
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 5e819a2...41b4392. Read the comment docs.
Thanks for opening this @daniel-mohr. Sorry we have not got back to you yet about this, there is a lot on at the moment keeping us very busy. In fact, realistically we might not be able to review this until the second half of next working week. I hope that is OK. We will get back to you around then, though. From a quick glance it looks promising!
That's fine!
By the way: You can also use the docker image i386/debian locally and checkout the version before the fix #32, e. g. git checkout tags/v3.3.3
or git checkout 91e4210
, and get:
ERROR: test_Units_conform (test_Units.UnitsTest)
Tests the `conform` class method on `Units`.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/app/cfunits/cfunits/test/test_Units.py", line 151, in test_Units_conform
x = Units.conform([360], Units("second"), Units("minute"))
File "/app/cfunits/cfunits/units.py", line 2243, in conform
y = x.view(dtype=float)
ValueError: When changing to a larger dtype, its size must be a divisor of the total size in bytes of the last axis of the array.
So, #32 is a fix for linux, too. ;-)
And I hope this pull request here (#37) will help to ensure that such things will not happen again in the future.
Checks on master already not working at the moment. Therefore we have the same errors here.
Merged #41 here to fix the workflow.
Yes, I will adapt it.
But I'm not sure windows-latest
is the right way. This only runs tests on the 'latest' version and problems like #40 are not detected.
Further at the moment windows-latest
is windows-2019
and if windows-2022
becomes stable I expect windows-latest
changed to windows-2019
and we would loose testing on windows-2019
.
But we could add windows-latest
as additional system? (Would lead to an unnecessary run at the moment.)
But I'm not sure windows-latest is the right way. This only runs tests on the 'latest' version and problems like #40 are not detected.
Sure, please adapt it however you think is best, so long as we don't use the (soon-to-be) deprecated windows-2016
.
OK, I set windows-2016
as deprecated and added windows-2022
as beta.
So both are used, but the complete workflow should not fail due to these windows versions.
Sorry, initially I was thinking this is a test pull request in my own fork.
As offered in #36 this pull request provides running the test suite on debian latest (32 bit).
Further (as addressed in #31) i combined all test suite run into a single file (but still different jobs).