Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #278 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 93.08% 92.43% -0.65%
==========================================
Files 38 38
Lines 2863 2896 +33
==========================================
+ Hits 2665 2677 +12
- Misses 198 219 +21 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
I'm guessing CodeCov's issue is because the tests are for v8.0.6 and this requires < 8 to test? |
|
I believe that's correct. There is code being added, but the tests that cover those lines are not being run on the CI. Out of curiosity, do the tests pass if you run them against the v7 database? i.e. pytest fiasco --ascii-dbase-root ~/.chianti --ascii-dbase-url http://download.chiantidatabase.org/CHIANTI_v7.1.4_database.tar.gz --disable-file-hash --skip-version-checkIf they do, we should add an additional test to the CI for v7. |
|
They do not pass, but it looks like it's because all of the I suppose to test the older versions, these functions would need to be ignored. |
|
Ok that's not too surprising. We could just use the |
|
Right, I've updated the tests to ignore the ones that require The version 9 test is failing now, though, so perhaps I've done the fixture incorrectly? I can't see the root of the issue right now. It runs correctly in the command line... |
|
Ok I think I've fixed it. There was a small bug in handling multiple conditions, but I went ahead and just refactored that mark as my original implementation was clumsy anyway. This also makes using the marks a bit less awkward, i.e. you just specify a string rather than always needing two string which makes handling multiple conditions easier. This does implicitly assume the conditions are joined by an |
|
Thanks for the help! My coding was probably a bit awkward there. |
|
No worries. My initial implementation made it awkward to extend to multiple conditions. |
|
Thanks as always for taking this on! |
Fixes #17
(There are a couple of notes in that thread about how to modify functions to use
.splupsfiles that this does not address. I've only added the file reader here.)Tested with data from version 7.1. I tried both C V and C VI since their
.splupsfiles have different lengths.