-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
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
Cleanup tests restructure #303
Conversation
DonBraulio
commented
Nov 2, 2023
- Remove some folders that don't make sense after tests restucture completed.
- Update create_operator.py to the new tests format.
1976cfa
to
ff1b461
Compare
8de45d4
to
572be01
Compare
Coverage reportMain: 91.10% | PR: 91.10% | Diff: 0.00 ✅ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
@parameterized.parameters( | ||
{{"in_timestamps": [0.0, 1.0], "out_timestamps": [0.0, 1.0]}}, | ||
{{"in_timestmaps": [1.0, 2.0], "out_timestamps": [1.0, 2.0]}}, | ||
) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the most probable scenario is not using parameterized rather than using it? I'd leave it out of the template (and maybe add a commented line with the import or a sentence nudging the developer towards using it if needed?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's a positive thing to induce ourselves to use parametrized tests, since you tend to add more test cases and edge cases. Also, the effort to remove this is negligible. Don't you agree?