C++ refactoring: reducers #1099
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@jpivarski - please, have a look. I've added a few |
|
|
…-> int64 are not done.
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
…t-hep/awkward-1.0 into ianna/refactoring-reducers
jpivarski
requested changes
Sep 23, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I recognize this is a lot of work, and what's here looks great! I made a few "cleanup" changes to the branch, including a replacement of reducer strings with reducer singleton objects, since you create the objects anyway to give them different apply methods. (The singletons are implemented as class objects with @classmethods, so that we can use inheritance, but there's no need to create instances of these classes just to use a stateless function.)
Some of the implementations were missing, and that's surely due to underwhelming test coverage in the original v1 (my fault). I've added the implementations where it was easy and NotImplementedError with the commented-out C++ code where it wasn't. UnionArray can't be done without simplify_uniontype, so that will have to wait for after this PR, but the others could be done (with added tests, to improve the test coverage).
Instead of commenting out failing tests, I added pytest marks to them, so that they show up in the report. That makes it harder to overlook the fact that they're not done.
The missing implementations are indicated with FIXMEs after their NotImplementedErrors. As stated above, UnionArray should wait until after this PR.
ianna
commented
Sep 24, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jpivarski - I think, most of the comments are addressed. More tests are needed, I'm working on these. I need some guidance on introducing a dimension_optiontype and an initial for min and max reducers.
jpivarski
reviewed
Sep 27, 2021
|
@jpivarski - as discussed: coverage for Note, the missing, not covered code in this case is for Windows. Here is the rest: Coverage report: 81%
|
|
No complaints about the 96%! (I don't think 100% is a goal because of things like the Windows cases. Twisting them to count as covered, for instance with one-line I'm curious about the coverage for the whole |
jpivarski
approved these changes
Sep 28, 2021
|
@jpivarski - apologies, I did not mean to delete your comment I just added a tick mark... |
|
|
@jpivarski - pre-commit complains about B904: Within an |
This seems to be a new rule, and it pops up in many places. We probably need to just ignore it globally ( |
|
@jpivarski - I think, I've addressed all issues. Please, have a look. Thanks |
|
I agree. Looks great, thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
address https://github.com/scikit-hep/awkward-1.0/projects/4#card-68315181