Closed bhazelton closed 2 years ago
Merging #379 (3d70c9e) into main (5cb2c6d) will increase coverage by
0.00%
. The diff coverage is100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #379 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 99.15% 99.15%
=======================================
Files 13 13
Lines 2001 2009 +8
=======================================
+ Hits 1984 1992 +8
Misses 17 17
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
pyuvsim/astropy_interface.py | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
pyuvsim/__init__.py | 81.25% <100.00%> (+1.25%) |
:arrow_up: |
pyuvsim/analyticbeam.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
pyuvsim/antenna.py | 96.15% <100.00%> (+0.07%) |
:arrow_up: |
pyuvsim/baseline.py | 90.90% <100.00%> (+0.43%) |
:arrow_up: |
pyuvsim/mpi.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
pyuvsim/profiling.py | 97.72% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
pyuvsim/simsetup.py | 99.88% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) |
:arrow_up: |
pyuvsim/telescope.py | 100.00% <100.00%> (ø) |
|
pyuvsim/utils.py | 98.11% <100.00%> (+0.01%) |
:arrow_up: |
... and 1 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 5cb2c6d...3d70c9e. Read the comment docs.
Thanks for the detailed review on this @steven-murray! I think I addressed all your comments. I also fixed the docs for files in the scripts, benchmarking and reference_simulation folders and fixed some warning handling that was making the tests fail. Are you willing to take another look?
Thanks @bhazelton, yup, will take another look soon
From looking at the diff, everything looks good. I'm just having a quick peruse of the compiled docs on rtd, and here are some comments:
reuse_spline
on:
I think that's it!
@steven-murray Thank for the careful read through the RTD rendered docs!! The biggest problem was that the RTD theme had broken all instances of bulleted lists (this happened before on pyuvdata but the fix I used there no longer works -- this is a new problem, see https://github.com/readthedocs/sphinx_rtd_theme/issues/1236)
I think I fixed all the things you raised except that I cannot seem to alter the behavior for how attributes are listed. They are in the docstring with a heading, but that heading is removed automagically by Sphinx. The appearance is a little better in some non-RTD themes in terms of differentiating them from parameters, but even in those themes they do not have the Attributes
heading. If you have suggestions on this front I'd be happy to hear them!
@steven-murray I figured out how to make the Attributes section look like the Parameters section. Do you like this better than what we had before?
I just realized that we're using an old version of the RTD yaml on this repo. I'm going to update to the newer version in this PR as well.
@steven-murray ok, I think I've got everything working properly now if you want to take another look.
Yes, the fix for the bullets is to pin the theme to exactly 0.5.2. Older builds from that had one cause for the bullets to fail and the newer builds have a different cause for the bullets to fail 😂
Description
Updated docstrings throughout. This builds on work started by @aelanman.
Also upgraded the RTD yaml to the newest version.
Motivation and Context
closes #230
Types of changes
Checklist:
For all pull requests:
Documentation change checklist: