Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

use environment variables for tagging #290

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 22, 2021
Merged

use environment variables for tagging #290

merged 4 commits into from
Oct 22, 2021

Conversation

Datseris
Copy link
Member

Hope I did everything right!

Closes #289

Hope I did everything right!
@Datseris
Copy link
Member Author

@JonasIsensee I've noticed that collect_results doesn't do any tagging when saving the dictionary. I guess it's on purpose? Should we add tagging there?

Maybe it is not so helpful per se to know the state of the code for producing the results dictionary. What's more important is to know the state of the code when producing each result...? Then again, it doesn't cost much to just replace wsave with tagsave in

!newfile && wsave(filename, Dict("df" => df))

@JonasIsensee
Copy link
Member

JonasIsensee commented Sep 13, 2021

@JonasIsensee I've noticed that collect_results doesn't do any tagging when saving the dictionary. I guess it's on purpose? Should we add tagging there?

Maybe it is not so helpful per se to know the state of the code for producing the results dictionary. What's more important is to know the state of the code when producing each result...? Then again, it doesn't cost much to just replace wsave with tagsave in

!newfile && wsave(filename, Dict("df" => df))

I suppose it was on purpose. My mental model of the collect_results dataframe was always, that it should be rather state-less. So, data deserves a tag but the analysis doesn't.

(I also always had only light-weight analysis inside the collect_results. I feel that this is not the right place to do computationally heavy stuff.)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 22, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #290 (c60d40a) into master (b8adff1) will decrease coverage by 0.32%.
The diff coverage is 83.33%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #290      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.22%   91.90%   -0.33%     
==========================================
  Files           7        7              
  Lines         643      642       -1     
==========================================
- Hits          593      590       -3     
- Misses         50       52       +2     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/saving_tools.jl 78.30% <66.66%> (-1.89%) ⬇️
src/naming.jl 96.92% <100.00%> (ø)
src/saving_files.jl 93.10% <100.00%> (ø)
src/project_setup.jl 88.88% <0.00%> (-0.09%) ⬇️

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 b8adff1...c60d40a. Read the comment docs.

@Datseris Datseris merged commit 599a9b2 into master Oct 22, 2021
@Datseris Datseris deleted the env_tag branch October 22, 2021 16:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Global ENV variables for default values of tag, storepatch, etc.
2 participants