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

Add isatomic function and tests #58

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 12, 2017
Merged

Add isatomic function and tests #58

merged 3 commits into from
Jun 12, 2017

Conversation

dpsanders
Copy link
Member

@dpsanders dpsanders commented Jun 11, 2017

Closes #46

@dpsanders dpsanders mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2017
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jun 11, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #58 into master will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #58      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.61%   91.62%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files          21       21              
  Lines         966      967       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits          885      886       +1     
  Misses         81       81
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/IntervalArithmetic.jl 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
src/intervals/special.jl 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️

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 73b91d8...1f8d642. Read the comment docs.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

3 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

2 similar comments
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 11, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling f4ce358 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

Copy link
Member

@lbenet lbenet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot!

I have one minor correction (docstrings) and a
a simple suggestion. Merge at will!

"""
isatomic(x::Interval)

Check is an interval `x` is an *atomic* interval, i.e. is unable to be split.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A correction and an addition: "Check if ... to be split in finite precision.`

@test isatomic(Interval(1))
@test isatomic(Interval(2.3, 2.3))
@test isatomic(emptyinterval())
@test isatomic(Interval(realmax(), ∞))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This can be written as: @test isatomic(@interval(Inf)).

@dpsanders
Copy link
Member Author

Fixed, thanks!

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jun 12, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.009%) to 91.624% when pulling 1f8d642 on isatomic into 73b91d8 on master.

@dpsanders dpsanders merged commit 1bf5896 into master Jun 12, 2017
@dpsanders dpsanders deleted the isatomic branch August 2, 2017 19:40
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.

None yet

4 participants