-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Added more implementations of map2Eval #1819
Conversation
I hit a case where I wanted laziness with map2Eval and realized in many cases where we could have it, we do not. There were all the cases I saw that we missed, which I hope our existing tests cover.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1819 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 94.88% 94.96% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 241 241
Lines 4148 4173 +25
Branches 103 106 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 3936 3963 +27
+ Misses 212 210 -2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@kailuowang @edmundnoble can you gentlemen review this? I think it should be ready. |
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.
Lgtm
* Added more implementations of map2Eval I hit a case where I wanted laziness with map2Eval and realized in many cases where we could have it, we do not. There were all the cases I saw that we missed, which I hope our existing tests cover. * Add tests for map2 and map2Eval * remove incorrect instances
I hit a case where I wanted laziness with map2Eval and realized in many
cases where we could have it, we do not. There were all the cases I saw
that we missed, which I hope our existing tests cover.