Closed mreineck closed 3 years ago
Just linking to #55 since some of the discussion there relates to this PR.
@mdavezac Any idea why tests are failing here?
The tests fail because the released version of ducc0
does not have the forward_adjoint
method yet. I'll update this during the next days.
I have created a new ducc0
release with which the tests should work.
The fully general adjointness test for the forward/forward_adjoint
pair still fails (locally for me, I have not added it to the test suite), but the tests equivalent to those in ssht
itself should pass.
CI looks OK, but please double check that I'm really testing the things you are interested in!
Thanks @mreineck, sounds good. I think the tests you have are sufficient and the extra one (i.e. the forward/forward_adjoint
pair) is not necessary (as discussed further in #55) .
@mdavezac Could you take a look when you get a moment and let us know if you've any comments? If not we can go ahead and merge (and create a new release).
Looks good. I'll just add a few :lipstick: commits, bump the minor version, and then I'll merge.
This PR adds all necessary machinery to allow
forward_adjoint
operations withducc0
.Problem:
ssht
andducc0
currently produce different results when runningforward
on non-bandlimited maps, and so it is not entirely clear how to test the consistency between both implementations. We'll have to iterate on this a bit, I think.