Closed weiglszonja closed 2 years ago
@bendichter
I don't get why coverage for extraction_tools.py decreases like this since I removed the decorator function from get_frames
.
It looks so bad, how can I fix it?
@weiglszonja just a guess until I can take a closer look but the diff of 0.53% appears to be due to the entire get_frames_arga decorator now being untested (likely because it is no longer called on any frame retrieval function?) : https://app.codecov.io/gh/catalystneuro/roiextractors/compare/186/changes#D1L291
Simple fix is to also remove the code for the decorator along with this but perhaps that’s best done in a separate PR. As long as the interface itself has full coverage, it’s fine. Can always improve global coverage in follow-ups
Merging #186 (0eeab92) into master (1f8a479) will decrease coverage by
0.52%
. The diff coverage is80.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #186 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 72.56% 72.03% -0.53%
==========================================
Files 33 33
Lines 2114 2117 +3
==========================================
- Hits 1534 1525 -9
- Misses 580 592 +12
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
unittests | 72.03% <80.00%> (-0.53%) |
:arrow_down: |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/roiextractors/multiimagingextractor.py | 98.68% <80.00%> (-1.32%) |
:arrow_down: |
src/roiextractors/extraction_tools.py | 67.12% <0.00%> (-5.03%) |
:arrow_down: |
MultiImagingExtractor
get_video
calls throughget_frames
to handle iterating over frames from multiple ImagingExtractors. This condition in catalystneuro/neuroconv#54 was necessary because it can happen that for one of the extractors a single frame is returned, so in order to remove it, we have to make sure that frames are not squeezed inMultiImagingExtractor
and theget_video
returns the frames correctly.This PR removes squeezing the frames in
MultiImagingExtractor
and adds a test forget_video
.Resolve #161