Skip to content

Conversation

chriselrod
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes #14

I don't know how extreme you want to go. Maybe be worth trying all numbers along boundaries, at least for Float64 or Float32. The generic matmul fallback is very slow for integers, so we don't really want to test very big sizes there even without code coverage.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 30, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #16 (07be384) into master (78acb28) will increase coverage by 0.90%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master       #16      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   99.09%   100.00%   +0.90%     
===========================================
  Files           9         9              
  Lines         110       109       -1     
===========================================
  Hits          109       109              
+ Misses          1         0       -1     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/block_sizes.jl 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/macrokernels.jl 100.00% <0.00%> (+9.09%) ⬆️

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 78acb28...07be384. Read the comment docs.

@DilumAluthge DilumAluthge merged commit 5975d5c into master Dec 30, 2020
@DilumAluthge DilumAluthge deleted the biggertestmats branch December 30, 2020 19:18
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.

Run the non-coverage tests with bigger matrices
2 participants