Closed rwest closed 4 years ago
Merging #67 into master will increase coverage by
<.01%
. The diff coverage is45.81%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #67 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 63.77% 63.78% +<.01%
==========================================
Files 27 27
Lines 4663 4667 +4
==========================================
+ Hits 2974 2977 +3
- Misses 1689 1690 +1
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
autotst/calculator/vibrational_analysis_test.py | 83.07% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/calculator/vibrational_analysis.py | 86.3% <0%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/data/update.py | 10.31% <0%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/geometry.py | 88.63% <0%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/species.py | 71.25% <100%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/job/job_test.py | 98.96% <100%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/data/base.py | 38.4% <22%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/conformer/systematic.py | 61.2% <33.33%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/job/job.py | 44.1% <48.78%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
autotst/data/inputoutput.py | 65.25% <50%> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
... and 4 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 bb67c2d...16ca1ec. Read the comment docs.
Definitely a good move with this PR. But after browsing through the Travis CI for the branch, it looks like .format
was substituted with .
rather than nothing. Thanks for the effort though!
Fixed the mistake (I had done one by hand because it was split across lines, and made a manual error). So I think this shows the PyCharm method is quite effective. Although it reduces it to a few clicks/keystrokes per instance, you still have to do each instance separately, so it might be worth looking into a wholesale approach.
Either way, I'll leave this here for you to decide when best to do it, in relation to your other changes.
I'm liking f-strings as opposed to .format so I think we should work on this. I've also looking into a package called flynt and it's doing a good job on this. I'm working on some of this right now and I'l push some changes in a bit.
Okay, just pushed some changes, let me know thoughts
Fixed a couple of typos and did a rebase to truncate those into their proper PRs. Let's see how the tests go but I think it should be ready to merge in shortly
Okay, tests pass and everything's looking good. Unless @davidfarinajr has any complaints, I'll merge this in shortly
Well, there's also the codecov/patch not passing... but that doesn't really bother me too much.
Sorry, not sure how I missed this earlier today. Looks good, you can merge.
These are nicer to look at, easier to debug, etc.
I did these using the "convert to f-string literal" code intention in PyCharm. Click inside a .format() string somewhere and press Alt-Enter on your keyboard, then select "convert to f-string literal".
This first commit I just did a couple of files.
There are probably some tools to do it faster than one at a time, like https://github.com/asottile/pyupgrade
Think about when best to do this in regards other open pull requests, to minimize merge conflicts. But I think it's worth doing - either with one concerted effort or gradually as you touch code.