-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 88
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
Missing coverage? #646
Comments
Thanks David! 🙏 |
Reopening as the JSON case is still present |
This is the test that would ideally cover the JSON case numcodecs/numcodecs/tests/test_json.py Lines 61 to 85 in 88660de
However we coerce to a NumPy array, which bypasses the numcodecs/numcodecs/tests/test_json.py Line 82 in 88660de
So either that test needs to be adapted to trigger the failure or a new test is needed |
In the recent CodeCov report, they flag these lines as uncoverged
numcodecs/numcodecs/json.py
Lines 68 to 72 in ad1ad67
It is a little unclear why as those lines were introduced with corresponding tests some time ago in PR ( #417 ). AFAICT recent NumPy versions still need to use that fallback. In fact that behavior is expected and defined in NEP 34
This may need further investigation to resolve
Additionally CodeCov flags this line as uncovered.
numcodecs/numcodecs/tests/test_zarr3.py
Lines 51 to 55 in ad1ad67
Just looking at it, would naively add a
# pragma: no cover
, but wanted to mention it here in case there is something I'm missingThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: