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

Simulate TOA flags #1682

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 22, 2023
Merged

Simulate TOA flags #1682

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 22, 2023

Conversation

abhisrkckl
Copy link
Contributor

@abhisrkckl abhisrkckl commented Nov 17, 2023

The infrastructure for doing this is already there in pint.toa and is straightforward to use. This PR just uses that in pint.simulation.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 17, 2023

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (c2c9434) 68.40% compared to head (d5c99e6) 68.42%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1682      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.40%   68.42%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         104      104              
  Lines       24336    24336              
  Branches     4345     4345              
==========================================
+ Hits        16646    16652       +6     
+ Misses       6603     6598       -5     
+ Partials     1087     1086       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@dlakaplan
Copy link
Contributor

This is fine, but is it needed? You can just modify the TOAs after creation like:
t['be']='GUPPI'
(from your test).

@abhisrkckl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not strictly needed, but I think this will be a nice thing to have in terms of convenience.

@dlakaplan
Copy link
Contributor

Maybe an addition to the docs explaining some of the flag access methods would be more useful. but I guess if you want to keep this too then it''s fine and I can merge it.

@abhisrkckl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Maybe an addition to the docs explaining some of the flag access methods would be more useful.

I agree. I can add that in a later PR.

This one is ready to merge.

@dlakaplan dlakaplan merged commit 268e304 into nanograv:master Nov 22, 2023
9 checks passed
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