Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Add watershed ops #510
@SimonSchmid, as of now there is no
I was also wondering whether or not it would be best to separate commit d2954fa2c66a85986b2a8413a78877ad858867e0 into smaller commits considering its sheer size. While it is not necessary to do so it would make the documentation a lot easier to read.
Other than the concerns presented above I think this PR is ready to be merged.
I don't really see the reason for that in this case, as most of the files are either new and somehow belong together. Other than that: @SimonSchmid maybe this PR is something you can tackle at the upcoming hackathon?
@gselzer That class is part of the
Well, do the tests work as things currently stand on this topic branch? Simple enough to try them, no?
I agree with @dietzc that if it's a new implementation being added, having a big commit that dumps it in is not so bad. Yes, it's a big diff, but it can also be a real pain to make smaller commits for little practical benefit. There is a balance there.
@gselzer The real questions are: A) do you like this implementation; and B) does it work?
@dietzc Just to give you some background, I asked @gselzer to review some of the pending PRs so that we can start reducing the backlog. I'm hoping he can ping me when specific PRs are good to merge, and also ping each PR's author(s) again when they have not responded to requests for revision, etc.
Thanks for working on this @SimonSchmid! The implementation of the algorithm looks sound to me. I have made some comments, that need to be discussed before merging this. The most prominent one being how we want to handle non-empty
out() (in conjunction with a provided
I am @ctrueden. But I think the history of this branch could be improved, especially b70b028 (WIP) and cf8020d. We could try to squash some of them together, since splitting them apart looks cumbersome? Is it something @gselzer would do, or do you, @SimonSchmid, have time to that?