Closed Remi-Gau closed 2 years ago
Merging #197 (7bc55c0) into dev (627ceef) will decrease coverage by
3.68%
. The diff coverage is0.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #197 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 81.71% 78.02% -3.69%
==========================================
Files 30 31 +1
Lines 678 710 +32
==========================================
Hits 554 554
- Misses 124 156 +32
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
unittests | 78.02% <0.00%> (-3.69%) |
:arrow_down: |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/convertSourceToRaw.m | 0.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
|
src/utils/removeDateEntity.m | 0.00% <0.00%> (ø) |
:mega: Codecov can now indicate which changes are the most critical in Pull Requests. Learn more
Thank you! I used removeDateEntity !
with the master branch of CPP-SPM
repo, bids-matlab
submodule is on a HEAD
(detached?) branch. And I was using CPP-BIDS
with CPP-SPM
submodules together. And it was giving an error during BIDS data reading.
If CPP-SPM
is not in the same repo, I bet it'll work as it is.
In my case, I updated bids-matlab
branch in CPP-SPM
repo to be compatible with CPP-BIDS
functions.
BIDS = bids.layout(pathToDataSet, 'use_schema', false);
K>> BIDS = bids.layout(pathToDataSet, 'use_schema', false)
Undefined function or variable 'function_name'.
Error in bids.Schema/load (line 75)
bids.internal.error_handling(function_name,
'missingDirectory', msg, false, true);
Error in bids.Schema (line 34)
obj = load(obj, use_schema);
Error in bids.layout (line 110)
schema = bids.Schema(use_schema);
yeah there might be a bit of branch juggling indeed.
yeah there might be a bit of branch juggling indeed.
fixes #196