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

Fix small fp precision failure in linear regression doctest test #4884

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Sep 8, 2022

Conversation

lowener
Copy link
Contributor

@lowener lowener commented Sep 8, 2022

Closes #4860.
Skipping this doctest. There are already pytests to check the correctness of the computation with precision tolerance.

@lowener lowener requested a review from a team as a code owner September 8, 2022 12:18
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Cython / Python Cython or Python issue label Sep 8, 2022
@lowener lowener added bug Something isn't working 3 - Ready for Review Ready for review by team doc Documentation non-breaking Non-breaking change Cython / Python Cython or Python issue and removed Cython / Python Cython or Python issue doc Documentation labels Sep 8, 2022
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Base: 78.02% // Head: 78.07% // Increases project coverage by +0.05% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (2c1e4de) compared to base (7a0ab85).
Patch coverage: 87.65% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##           branch-22.10    #4884      +/-   ##
================================================
+ Coverage         78.02%   78.07%   +0.05%     
================================================
  Files               180      180              
  Lines             11385    11443      +58     
================================================
+ Hits               8883     8934      +51     
- Misses             2502     2509       +7     
Flag Coverage Δ
dask 46.23% <48.14%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
non-dask 67.37% <87.65%> (+0.10%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
python/cuml/benchmark/nvtx_benchmark.py 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
python/cuml/common/array.py 95.10% <85.10%> (-2.88%) ⬇️
python/cuml/preprocessing/TargetEncoder.py 85.07% <92.59%> (+1.00%) ⬆️
python/cuml/cluster/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
python/cuml/metrics/__init__.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
python/cuml/thirdparty_adapters/adapters.py 91.54% <100.00%> (+0.05%) ⬆️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@dantegd
Copy link
Member

dantegd commented Sep 8, 2022

@gpucibot merge

@rapids-bot rapids-bot bot merged commit 6b67dd4 into rapidsai:branch-22.10 Sep 8, 2022
@lowener lowener deleted the 22.10-docstring-lr branch September 9, 2022 13:04
jakirkham pushed a commit to jakirkham/cuml that referenced this pull request Feb 27, 2023
…idsai#4884)

Closes rapidsai#4860.
Skipping this doctest. There are already pytests to check the correctness of the computation with precision tolerance.

Authors:
  - Micka (https://github.com/lowener)

Approvers:
  - Dante Gama Dessavre (https://github.com/dantegd)

URL: rapidsai#4884
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3 - Ready for Review Ready for review by team bug Something isn't working Cython / Python Cython or Python issue non-breaking Non-breaking change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] Small fp precision failure in linear regression doctest test
3 participants