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

add some consistency checks of new tables() quick sizing approach #5525

Closed
MichaelChirico opened this issue Nov 13, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@MichaelChirico
Copy link
Member

MichaelChirico commented Nov 13, 2022

Yes good idea. With a caveat that if R-devel change object.size slightly it could break our test. Maybe find what object.size says now and match that but use that figure instead of the call. Then put the test that actually calls object.size somewhere off CRAN like maybe other.Rraw (by stretching how we think of other to include base). Or, just put it in other.Rraw only. But coverage, ok that's why in tests.Rraw too then.

Originally posted by @mattdowle in #5524 (comment)

@mattdowle
Copy link
Member

mattdowle commented Nov 14, 2022

and this issue can serve as a reminder to review all the changes to tables() and comments in #5524 and its follow-ups. I wouldn't normally make changes to master like this but I was working in the move_ram_tests branch for #5520 whose nature is resolving tipping points in rss to reveal the next test ID. I figured it was better to at least commit changes to tables() separately than do them in that branch. I expect some changes to tables() before release once #5520 is merged.

@jangorecki jangorecki modified the milestones: 1.14.9, 1.15.0 Oct 29, 2023
@jangorecki jangorecki modified the milestones: 1.15.0, 1.15.1 Nov 6, 2023
@MichaelChirico
Copy link
Member Author

I forget the context on this & am not particularly motivated to address it. We can revisit if there's a user request / the need arises again.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants