Opened 10 years ago

Closed 8 years ago

#10760 closed enhancement (duplicate)

Improve coverage test for gsl/interpolation.pyx

Reported by: demengeo Owned by: jason
Priority: trivial Milestone: sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
Component: misc Keywords:
Cc: Merged in:
Authors: Reviewers: Kannappan Sampath
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: Commit:
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description (last modified by mhansen)

Improve coverage test for gsl/interpolation.pyx to 33%.

Attachments (1)

track10760.patch (2.0 KB) - added by demengeo 10 years ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (7)

Changed 10 years ago by demengeo

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by mhansen

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by kcrisman

  • Reviewers set to Karl-Dieter Crisman
  • Status changed from needs_review to needs_work

These are good, I think, in general. Before a thorough look, can you also put some indirect tests in? Usually in Sage documentation __getitem__ and friends are tested via slicing, I think. In any case, this would help anyone who comes upon this and is wondering what those things do. The format is then

sage: test[i] # indirect doctest

or something like this. We do this for a number of underscore tests, though I don't think this is in the developer guide or anything.

comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by knsam

Looks like this ticket is invalid now (v. my Sage 5.7.beta3 coverage test):

knsam@PerverseSheaf:~/Downloads/sage-5.7.beta4/devel/sage/sage/gsl$ ../../../../sage --coverage interpolation.pyx 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCORE interpolation.pyx: 100.0% (11 of 11)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll put this up for review, in case, there are some parts of this patch, we could use positively.

~KnS

comment:4 Changed 8 years ago by knsam

  • Milestone set to sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
  • Status changed from needs_work to needs_review

comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by kcrisman

  • Authors O. Demengeon deleted
  • Reviewers changed from Karl-Dieter Crisman to Kannappan Sampath
  • Status changed from needs_review to positive_review

In fact, this was indeed done in #12036. And I even reviewed it, having forgotten about this one in the ensuing half-year plus...

comment:6 Changed 8 years ago by jdemeyer

  • Resolution set to duplicate
  • Status changed from positive_review to closed
Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.