codecov-commenter
commented
9 months ago Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 87.19%. Comparing base (
c96002c) to head (d1eb848).
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #446 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 87.12% 87.19% +0.06% ========================================== Files 122 122 Lines 17232 17262 +30 ========================================== + Hits 15014 15051 +37 + Misses 2218 2211 -7 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/NREL/reV/pull/446/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=NREL) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/NREL/reV/pull/446/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=NREL) | `87.19% <100.00%> (+0.06%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=NREL#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Previously you would run into cryptic OOM errors if you accidentally specified a 2D dataset in
h5_dsets. Not sure if that functionality is meant to handle 2D datasets, but there is now a warning that OOM errors may happen in that case.