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

90% doctest coverage thrust metaticket #12024

Closed
williamstein opened this issue Nov 13, 2011 · 87 comments
Closed

90% doctest coverage thrust metaticket #12024

williamstein opened this issue Nov 13, 2011 · 87 comments

Comments

@williamstein
Copy link
Contributor

After deleting the server directory (#11409) we need to add doctests to about 588 more functions to get coverage to 90%, which is a major goal for sage-5.0, which we've been working on getting to for over a year now. I did an audit and came up with about 350 functions in 18 files for which adding coverage will not be too hard.

Just edit the ticket description and add your name after the * that you will get coverage to 100% on that file. You an also create a ticket with your tests (put #number) in. Then it will be easy to referee all these doctest patches. Try to make different tickets if/when you find bugs, and restrict your ticket to just doctests so it is easy to referee. You can also add another file to the list.

Need Review / Need Work(243 functions to doctest, 25 functions to remove):

Claimed (155 functions to doctest):

Unclaimed (102 functions to doctest, 21 functions to remove):

  • matrix/matrix_window.pyx: 0% (0 of 26), medium, look at some code elsewhere that uses this, and just go through examples -- ?

  • matrix/matrix_window_modn_dense.pyx: 0% (0 of 11), medium -- ?

  • rings/integer.pyx: 90% (124 of 137), medium, since you have to document and test functions related to the integer pool -- ?

  • rings/polynomial/convolution.py: 46% (6 of 13), medium, since all functions are documented but coming up with good tests could be tricky -- ?

  • rings/fast_arith.pyx: 12% (1 of 8), harder, since there are additional cdef functions to document and test and you need to worry about overflow in arithmetic with C ints -- ?

Positive review, awaiting merge (31 functions doctested):

Complete (393 functions doctested, 16 functions removed):

CC: @kcrisman

Component: doctest coverage

Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12024

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@fredrik-johansson
Copy link

comment:3

The file from hell is #8791

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein
Copy link
Contributor Author

comment:5

Replying to @fredrik-johansson:

The file from hell is #8791

I've put a link above, added your patch to 8791 directly to avoid confusion, and set it to "needs review". Thanks! And we will consider reviewing this a very high priority.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@roed314

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@jhpalmieri

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@roed314

This comment has been minimized.

@sagetrac-jpang

This comment has been minimized.

@williamstein

This comment has been minimized.

@ppurka

This comment has been minimized.

@ohanar

This comment has been minimized.

@mminzlaff

This comment has been minimized.

@saraedum

This comment has been minimized.

@saraedum

This comment has been minimized.

@roed314

This comment has been minimized.

@roed314

This comment has been minimized.

@roed314

This comment has been minimized.

@roed314

This comment has been minimized.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

jdemeyer commented Feb 5, 2013

comment:76

You might also be interested in #14061, which fixes the sage-coverage script and brings the results for sage-5.7.beta3 to

Overall weighted coverage score:  89.8%
Total number of functions:  31279
We need   48 more functions to get to 90% coverage.
We need 1612 more functions to get to 95% coverage.
We need 2863 more functions to get to 99% coverage.

@tscrim

This comment has been minimized.

@tscrim

This comment has been minimized.

@tscrim

This comment has been minimized.

@kcrisman

This comment has been minimized.

@jdemeyer
Copy link

Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests