Closed jamesmbaazam closed 6 months ago
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Comparison is base (
d22fd51
) 98.90% compared to head (56c0a74
) 98.94%.:exclamation: Current head 56c0a74 differs from pull request most recent head 32ccc24. Consider uploading reports for the commit 32ccc24 to get more accurate results
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Please check if the PR fulfils these requirements
[x] I have read the CONTRIBUTING guidelines
[x] The commit message follows our guidelines
[x] Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
[x] Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
It refactors
simulate_chains()
,simulate_summary()
, andlikelihood()
to remove duplicated code by converting them into internal helper functions follows:.init_susc_pop()
,.sample_possible_offspring()
, and.get_susceptible_offspring()
..check_sim_args()
, which checks the shared arguments of thesimulate_* ()
functions, and 2 smaller functions,.check_statistic_args()
which checksstat_max
andstatistic
together in multiple functions, and.check_time_args()
, which checks the time-related arguments:generation_time
,t0
, andtf
.Tests and documentation, where necessary, have been added.
What is the current behaviour? (You can also link to an open issue here)
This is a refactoring exercise and leads to no user-facing behaviour change.
What is the new behaviour (if this is a feature change)?
This is a refactoring exercise and leads to no user-facing behaviour change.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)
No.
Other information:
This PR closes #44.