Skip to content

Conversation

@FFroehlich
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 1, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 90.68323% with 15 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 77.10%. Comparing base (08b00ad) to head (6bbcbf2).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/edata.cpp 87.25% 13 Missing ⚠️
python/sdist/amici/sim/sundials/_pandas.py 50.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3079      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.77%   77.10%   -0.68%     
==========================================
  Files         313      313              
  Lines       20678    20678              
  Branches     1501     1500       -1     
==========================================
- Hits        16083    15943     -140     
- Misses       4586     4726     +140     
  Partials        9        9              
Flag Coverage Δ
cpp 71.19% <89.44%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
cpp_python 37.26% <29.81%> (ø)
petab 45.90% <26.25%> (ø)
petab_sciml 13.83% <0.00%> (ø)
python 69.84% <83.22%> (-0.03%) ⬇️
sbmlsuite-jax ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
include/amici/edata.h 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...hon/sdist/amici/importers/petab/_petab_importer.py 89.69% <100.00%> (ø)
...ython/sdist/amici/importers/petab/v1/conditions.py 98.33% <100.00%> (ø)
python/sdist/amici/sim/sundials/_numpy.py 87.42% <100.00%> (ø)
python/sdist/amici/sim/sundials/plotting.py 0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/hdf5.cpp 85.59% <100.00%> (ø)
src/model.cpp 85.40% <100.00%> (ø)
src/rdata.cpp 81.65% <100.00%> (ø)
python/sdist/amici/sim/sundials/_pandas.py 40.76% <50.00%> (ø)
src/edata.cpp 89.13% <87.25%> (ø)

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@FFroehlich FFroehlich marked this pull request as ready for review December 1, 2025 13:39
@FFroehlich FFroehlich requested a review from a team as a code owner December 1, 2025 13:39
Copy link
Member

@dweindl dweindl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good to have that renamed, but let's use singular/plural consistently.
Currently measurement functions use plural while the respective scale functions use singular.

Copy link
Member

@dweindl dweindl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, looks good!

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Dec 1, 2025

Quality Gate Failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
4.1% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

@dweindl dweindl added the breaking change Issue changes API in backwards-incompatible way label Dec 1, 2025
@FFroehlich FFroehlich added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 2, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit e32d65c Dec 2, 2025
24 of 29 checks passed
@FFroehlich FFroehlich deleted the edata_rename branch December 10, 2025 09:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

breaking change Issue changes API in backwards-incompatible way

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants