Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
WI add tests #54
WI add tests #54
Changes from 5 commits
8af9c09
6aab3c0
4f86c7e
1fa05ce
3b4cc39
92875b6
c6b659a
53e851a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
for completeness also check reflection_coefficient.
Would it make sense to check here also if they are all >= 0 and <= 1.0? ( We ought to have some way to deal with this in the code as well btw 🤔 But maybe can happen when you look into the FFT? (Does that have an issue btw? Then could add a todo there for checking that spectrum values are between 0 and 1 and throwing at least a warning if they aren't.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do you think this should be done in the test, or in the compute_spectrum_fdtd function? (The check that all values are betweenn 0 and 1)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would still assert it here that they are all between 0 and 1. Doesn't hurt and serves as a sanity check if the check inside the codebase is accidentally circumvented
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we still need the note? Actually, you don't set the wl here any more do you? Maybe would be better to to avoid breaking things when we change the default WL in the cfg. (then we might also not know anymore which values were supposed to be here either :D )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Note is not needed, created an issue about that. And indeed, the wavelength is not set, just using default
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Will add a check for the wavelength in the validate_cfg
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that is not a lot of digits. Why not more precise values?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is the output from running the compute_spectrum in my notebook, which I just copied. Can probably set higher precision for the output?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
aren't these mutually exclusive? If so, shouldn't rather be something like FDTD_source_type = "pulse" or "point" ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, the pulse is about continuous wave or not. point is about pointsource or linesource, both which can be continuous or have a pulse. But I can change the naming/structure for clarity
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmmm, well depends on the logic behind. "use_pointsource" to me sounds as if it is true I use a point source, otherwise I use none.
If it is like that fine, otherwise it should probably be sourcetype with FDTD_source_type="point" or "line"
Analogously for pulse