-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
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
[REVIEW]: Pyrimidine: An algebra-inspired Programming framework for evolutionary algorithms #6575
Comments
Hello humans, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
|
Software report:
Commit count by author:
|
Paper file info: 📄 Wordcount for ✅ The paper includes a |
License info: ✅ License found: |
|
Review checklist for @mmore500Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
Review checklist for @sjvrijnConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
Some comments on the manuscript. I plan to follow up shortly on the software content. Title blockRemove “These authors contributed equally” for one author. Summaryadd a space in “programming(OOP)” Statement of need
Algebra-inspired programming
Figure 1:— the twin y axis on right isn’t labeled Visualization:Because visualization isn’t a core feature of the library, consider rewriting the visualization section to exclude the plotting and focus on history extraction. The majority of the example code in this section is generic boilerplate matplotlib. An example to begin
ConclusionIn closing sentence,
References
Overall
|
Hi @Freakwill, @mmore500 has made some comments/requests about your paper ~2 weeks ago (see #6575 (comment)) Would it help if I transcribed these bullet points as checklists and register them as issues in your project repository? |
Ran into an install issue, will resume my review once that is unblocked! (Freakwill/pyrimidine#4) |
For the record, I have e-mailed the project author to make sure that the communication channels (this JOSS issue as well as the project issue) with him are open and asked him to try to publicly acknowledge the reviewer messages (even if the issue can't be adressed right away). |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
I use the following cross-references according to the docs of joss. But why dose it result in A concise comparison between `pyrimidine` and several popular frameworks provided in \autoref{frameworks}, such as ....
: Comparison of the popular genetic algorithm frameworks. []{label="frameworks"} |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot commands |
Hello @Freakwill, here are the things you can ask me to do:
|
@editorialbot check repository |
Software report:
Commit count by author:
|
Paper file info: 📄 Wordcount for ✅ The paper includes a |
License info: ✅ License found: |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
I see that you apparently still have some weird formatting in this line, I'll have a look. |
AFAICT the
|
|
And with respect to
shoud appear after the table, not before. These are the three uses of |
@editorialbot generate pdf |
Hi @Freakwill, Nice to see that you have solved the reference issues in the article! Could you comment/move forward the 3 open issues/PR that are still flagged as open so that the reviewers (@mmore500, @sjvrijn ) can close them move the review forward? For example, I have tested Kind regards, Sébastien |
Submitting author: @Freakwill (Congwei Song)
Repository: https://github.com/Freakwill/pyrimidine
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch):
Version: v1.5.4
Editor: @boisgera
Reviewers: @mmore500, @sjvrijn
Archive: Pending
Status
Status badge code:
Reviewers and authors:
Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)
Reviewer instructions & questions
@mmore500 & @sjvrijn, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @boisgera know.
✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨
Checklists
📝 Checklist for @mmore500
📝 Checklist for @sjvrijn
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: