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

Simplify divergence usage by making cov optional #44

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 26, 2024

Conversation

Pennycook
Copy link
Contributor

Previously, invoking the divergence function (and any functions that invoke the divergence function, like snapshot) required the P3 and coverage information to be stored in separate tables and connected by a key.

This setup is convenient for data drawn from a database that uses this representation already, but is inconvenient for users reading in data that directly associates a coverage string with each performance result.

This commit makes the cov DataFrame optional: if it exists, then behavior is the same as before; if it does not exist, then the library looks for coverage information stored alongside the P3 data.

Related issues

N/A

Proposed changes

  • Make cov optional when calling divergence.
  • Make cov optional when calling snapshot (which calls divergence internally).
  • Update documentation for both functions.

Previously, invoking the divergence function (and any functions that invoke
the divergence function, like snapshot) required the P3 and coverage
information to be stored in separate tables and connected by a key.

This setup is convenient for data drawn from a database that uses this
representation already, but is inconvenient for users reading in data
that directly associates a coverage string with each performance result.

This commit makes the cov DataFrame optional: if it exists, then behavior
is the same as before; if it does not exist, then the library looks for
coverage information stored alongside the P3 data.

Signed-off-by: John Pennycook <john.pennycook@intel.com>
@Pennycook Pennycook added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Apr 26, 2024
@Pennycook Pennycook added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Apr 26, 2024
@Pennycook Pennycook marked this pull request as ready for review April 26, 2024 16:36
Copy link
Contributor

@laserkelvin laserkelvin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@Pennycook Pennycook merged commit 76b269b into intel:main Apr 26, 2024
5 checks passed
@Pennycook Pennycook deleted the optional-coverage-key branch April 26, 2024 16:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants