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

Correct spurious underflow issues in non-central beta and t (also eff… #1134

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 17, 2024

Conversation

jzmaddock
Copy link
Collaborator

…ects nc-F via beta).

See scipy/scipy#20693.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.69%. Comparing base (a53b013) to head (92f5e2b).

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #1134      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    93.71%   93.69%   -0.03%     
===========================================
  Files          771      771              
  Lines        61105    61156      +51     
===========================================
+ Hits         57264    57299      +35     
- Misses        3841     3857      +16     
Files Coverage Δ
...lude/boost/math/distributions/non_central_beta.hpp 91.79% <100.00%> (+0.08%) ⬆️
include/boost/math/distributions/non_central_t.hpp 97.64% <100.00%> (-0.12%) ⬇️
test/test_nc_t.hpp 99.02% <100.00%> (+0.04%) ⬆️

... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a53b013...92f5e2b. Read the comment docs.

@jzmaddock
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@mborland can you see why the codecov report is failing? All the changed lines seem to be covered.

@mborland
Copy link
Member

@mborland can you see why the codecov report is failing? All the changed lines seem to be covered.

It looks like there were some large indirect changes: https://app.codecov.io/gh/boostorg/math/pull/1134/indirect-changes/. Did your diffs change the regions expm1 are tested in? Doesn't look like it to me. If they all look benign to you merging will re-baseline the total project coverage.

@jzmaddock
Copy link
Collaborator Author

It looks like there were some large indirect changes: https://app.codecov.io/gh/boostorg/math/pull/1134/indirect-changes/. Did your diffs change the regions expm1 are tested in? Doesn't look like it to me. If they all look benign to you merging will re-baseline the total project coverage.

I don't see how, and I certainly didn't effect the barycentic_rational code... merging.

@jzmaddock jzmaddock merged commit d1d59cd into develop May 17, 2024
69 of 70 checks passed
@NAThompson NAThompson deleted the scipy_issue_20693 branch May 17, 2024 16:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants