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

jointcal running on test data (DM-5297) #12

Merged
merged 9 commits into from Jun 22, 2016
Merged

jointcal running on test data (DM-5297) #12

merged 9 commits into from Jun 22, 2016

Conversation

parejkoj
Copy link
Collaborator

Jointcal now runs on some lsstSim data (twinkles 1), and includes a pseudo-validation test, to check that the astrometric fits improve as we add more images. There are several hacks to get around the metadata problems that I will deal with in a separate ticket.

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
import eups

from lsst.afw import geom, coord, table
from lsst.meas.astrom import astrometry
from lsst.meas import astrom
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I suggest from lsst.meas.astrometry import LoadAstrometryNetObjectsTask
I worry that it's hard for a user to tell what is brought in when you import all of lsst.meas (it's not a usage I've ever seen in our code before). Note that you probably don't need the config

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done. (though "from lsst.meas import astrom" shouldn't pollute the namespace at all.)

@timj
Copy link
Member

timj commented Jun 21, 2016

Can you modernize the tests to stop using suite whilst you are in there.

ipdb.set_trace()


def suite():
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please fix to remove suite

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Judging from SQR-012, the correct thing to do replace that whole block with this, right?

if __name__ == "__main__":
    lsst.utils.tests.init()
    unittest.main()

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes. And then see if it works. Technically add the setup_module function as well.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yup, did that too. Seems to work.

@parejkoj
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ok, I've cleaned up everything described above. I fear that rebase and squashing will be a fair bit of effort: should I bother?

@r-owen
Copy link
Contributor

r-owen commented Jun 21, 2016

I suggest having a try at rebasing. Make a copy of your repo before you start, so you can dig out if you make a mess.

@parejkoj parejkoj force-pushed the tickets/DM-5297 branch 2 times, most recently from e328668 to 3aaa964 Compare June 21, 2016 23:38
Replace boost::shared_ptr with std::shared_ptr
Replace boost::dynamic_pointer_cast to std::dynamic_pointer_cast
deboostify SWIG

Note that there still is the boost::intrusive_ptr to deal with.
This will be dealt with in a proper manner as part of DM-5501.
Cleanup print statements and size checks in jointcalTask.

Compute rms of 2 and 10 catalog runs as my test metric. It's not perfect, but
at least it provides a way to tell if I've broken anything. Still keeping around
the plotting code, as it's very useful for diagnostics.

Add validation_data_jointcal as optional dependency for the test calexps.
@parejkoj
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Review complete, code builds, tests run.

@parejkoj parejkoj closed this Jun 22, 2016
@parejkoj parejkoj reopened this Jun 22, 2016
@parejkoj parejkoj merged commit d4edc33 into master Jun 22, 2016
@ktlim ktlim deleted the tickets/DM-5297 branch August 25, 2018 06:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
5 participants