Open KyleVaughn opened 11 months ago
Review by @MeetMPatel
Clear explanation of the issue and the task! 👍
Hi @Lazy-Beee, I am reviewing your tasks, but I am not sure where to look for in your contribution in the code. I went through your commits but was not able to figure out. Can you point me to your contribution?
Thank you.
Hey @Lazy-Beee! I was looking through your tests and saw that your tests define nrows and ncols as size_t, while it is defined as const int (based on the stub code)
Hi @Lazy-Beee, I am reviewing your tasks, but I am not sure where to look for in your contribution in the code. I went through your commits but was not able to figure out. Can you point me to your contribution?
Thank you.
I think you can directly go to the coo branch (or the coo pull request) and check the corresponding code. The commits are a complete mess.
Hey, got hold of the mess of commits and reviewed your contribution. 👍
Hey @Lazy-Beee! I was looking through your tests and saw that your tests define nrows and ncols as size_t, while it is defined as const int (based on the stub code)
Thanks for your review. I am not sure whether you mean my tests in spmv/tests/COO_construction_test.cpp
. I define the nrows
and ncols
variables as int
to match the const int
type of the constructor input. When I verify whether nrows
and ncols
are assigned correctly, I transform them into size_t
using static_cast<size_t>
because the accessor functions return size_t
.
Description:
Test the constructor and destructor of the COO class. Test that:
Tasks:
Definition of done:
The unit test can check the COO class constructor and destructor and catch bugs if there's any.