Closed danb-pcs closed 5 years ago
Merging #98 into master will increase coverage by
<.01%
. The diff coverage is100%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #98 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 99.46% 99.47% +<.01%
==========================================
Files 6 6
Lines 374 381 +7
Branches 119 123 +4
==========================================
+ Hits 372 379 +7
Misses 1 1
Partials 1 1
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
nrrd/writer.py | 98.36% <100%> (+0.02%) |
:arrow_up: |
nrrd/reader.py | 100% <100%> (ø) |
: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 9407b01...5b72c37. Read the comment docs.
Hello, thanks for the PR. At a first glance, it looks good. Some unit tests would be a good thing to add.
On a more conceptual level, I'm not sure if making the three fields (labels, units, space units) always be a quoted string list is preferred.
Well, according to the NRRD spec, I suppose those three types should be surrounded by quotations (source)
Thanks! I will take a look at adding unit tests.
Also, I'm not sure if your code does this, but we probably want to remain backwards compatible in the sense that we should correctly parse the "quoted string list"'s correctly even if there are no quotes. In other words, fallback to just a string list if there are no quotes in the quoted string list.
Yes, the code accepts non-quoted strings, so it is backward-compatible with existing files.
@pcs-dan Just checking up on your progress, any luck with creating unit tests?
If you don't or won't have the time, I may be able to create some and finish this PR up in the next few weeks.
@addisonElliott I am sorry about the delay, I haven't had any time. I will try to add the tests in the next week.
It's no problem, I just wanted to make sure you were still up for the task. Take your time
This feature was previously marked in the source code as 'TODO'.