Closed ctuguinay closed 11 months ago
Merging #139 (732a279) into dev (b179117) will increase coverage by
2.59%
. Report is 10 commits behind head on dev. The diff coverage is92.59%
.:exclamation: Current head 732a279 differs from pull request most recent head 2276b11. Consider uploading reports for the commit 2276b11 to get more accurate results
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #139 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 84.75% 87.35% +2.59%
==========================================
Files 13 13
Lines 538 522 -16
==========================================
Hits 456 456
+ Misses 82 66 -16
Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
echoregions/core.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
echoregions/regions2d/regions2d.py | 85.45% <95.45%> (+1.50%) |
:arrow_up: |
echoregions/utils/api.py | 92.59% <89.18%> (+16.20%) |
:arrow_up: |
... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
@leewujung This PR is ready for a re-review. It addresses all the suggestions in the comment about and all the in-line comments.
This PR addresses #134 #135 #136:
Major Changes
regions2d.mask
now produces a 3d mask using theregionmask
mask_3d
functionregion_id
values in its dimensions and coordinates. Shape is now of the form (region_id, ping_time, depth) as opposed to storing region_id values/mask labels in a separate data array. Additionally, I felt it was confusing to give the user the ability to change the slice labels of the mask withinregions2d.mask
by passing in a list calledmask_labels
when thismask_labels
list was index-dependent on the region IDs getting passed in, and those region IDs were now getting filtered out (based on depth) prior to the masking.Minor Changes
regions2d.mask
changesregion_id = None
is now the default for maskingregion_id
as input for regions2d functions