Closed chriscoey closed 7 years ago
Agreed that this will make comparing the code and the paper much easier
Merging #377 into master will increase coverage by
0.28%
. The diff coverage is96.11%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #377 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 91.74% 92.02% +0.28%
==========================================
Files 4 4
Lines 1696 1744 +48
==========================================
+ Hits 1556 1605 +49
+ Misses 140 139 -1
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/conic_algorithm.jl | 92.58% <96.11%> (+0.38%) |
:arrow_up: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 64f274e...709b1b6. Read the comment docs.
Merging #377 into master will decrease coverage by
0.48%
. The diff coverage is94.9%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #377 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 91.74% 91.25% -0.49%
==========================================
Files 4 4
Lines 1696 1739 +43
==========================================
+ Hits 1556 1587 +31
- Misses 140 152 +12
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/solver.jl | 80.39% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
src/conic_algorithm.jl | 91.49% <94.9%> (-0.71%) |
:arrow_down: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 64f274e...366b1ba. Read the comment docs.
the new exp cone s=0 failure case tests are a bit fragile on GLPK unfortunately. CPLEX is fine
i will comment them for now and leave the issue open. we may need to play with tolerances. there is also a potential issue with r = 0
fixes partially #368, but the failure case tests are commented out rn because they do not pass with GLPK
brings the math in the code in line with the math in the MPC paper