Skip to content

More generalizations for generic block types #144

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 12, 2025

Conversation

mtfishman
Copy link
Member

Splitting off more generalizations from #136.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 12, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.88889% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 75.29%. Comparing base (51fceec) to head (6c1b5e0).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/blocksparsearrayinterface/arraylayouts.jl 80.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #144      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.26%   75.29%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          35       35              
  Lines        1807     1809       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         1360     1362       +2     
  Misses        447      447              
Flag Coverage Δ
docs 7.75% <33.33%> (+0.10%) ⬆️

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

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

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

@mtfishman mtfishman merged commit f991254 into main Jun 12, 2025
18 of 19 checks passed
@mtfishman mtfishman deleted the mf/more_generic_blocktype branch June 12, 2025 21:48
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.

1 participant