codecov[bot]
commented
6 months ago Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Comparison is base (
ed5d62c) 63.14% compared to head (76584e3) 63.14%.
Additional details and impacted files
```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## 0.2 #787 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 63.14% 63.14% ======================================= Files 53 53 Lines 5581 5581 ======================================= Hits 3524 3524 Misses 2057 2057 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/787/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/qiboteam/qibolab/pull/787/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam) | `63.14% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=qiboteam#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
Since pulses are greatly changed (and they will keep changing in the next future), it is much better to rewrite it from scratch, possibly using ideas from the old one, but much of the implementation is going to be reworked anyhow