codecov[bot]
commented
1 year ago Codecov Report
Base: 84.39% // Head: 84.31% // Decreases project coverage by -0.08% :warning:
Coverage data is based on head (
46abbae) compared to base (eee0640). Patch coverage: 57.14% of modified lines in pull request are covered.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #76 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 84.39% 84.31% -0.09% ========================================== Files 44 44 Lines 2641 2652 +11 Branches 399 399 ========================================== + Hits 2229 2236 +7 - Misses 288 292 +4 Partials 124 124 ``` | Flag | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | unittests | `83.59% <57.14%> (-0.81%)` | :arrow_down: | 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=SciQLop#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more. | [Impacted Files](https://codecov.io/gh/SciQLop/speasy/pull/76?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=SciQLop) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [speasy/core/cache/\_providers\_caches.py](https://codecov.io/gh/SciQLop/speasy/pull/76/diff?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=SciQLop#diff-c3BlYXN5L2NvcmUvY2FjaGUvX3Byb3ZpZGVyc19jYWNoZXMucHk=) | `87.00% <40.00%> (-2.94%)` | :arrow_down: | | [speasy/core/data\_containers.py](https://codecov.io/gh/SciQLop/speasy/pull/76/diff?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=SciQLop#diff-c3BlYXN5L2NvcmUvZGF0YV9jb250YWluZXJzLnB5) | `87.35% <100.00%> (+0.22%)` | :arrow_up: | | [speasy/core/proxy/\_\_init\_\_.py](https://codecov.io/gh/SciQLop/speasy/pull/76/diff?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=SciQLop#diff-c3BlYXN5L2NvcmUvcHJveHkvX19pbml0X18ucHk=) | `83.50% <0.00%> (+2.06%)` | :arrow_up: | Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us [how you rate us](https://about.codecov.io/nps?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=SciQLop). Have a feature suggestion? [Share it here.](https://app.codecov.io/gh/feedback/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=SciQLop):umbrella: View full report at Codecov.
:loudspeaker: Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.
This PR covers both issues described in #75 , first when we fail to load a cache fragment, we just continue and get corresponding data as if it never was in cache. Then there was an assumption that all axes values were numerical, let's just support the case where we can also get pure text in axes data.