-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Parameter table subset files. #407
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would be neat to have a test-case for this, not sure whether this should go here or added to the testsuite (ping @yannikschaelte)
I would prefer a test case here. The test suite for petab version 1 does not yet cover such tests (e.g. on yaml support, integration of files etc.). But would make sense to add a test at some point. PEtab-dev/petab_test_suite#26 |
can you change base branch to develop? |
thanks for noting. yes, base branch should always be develop, and then once from develop to master at some point. see here https://pyabc.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contribute.html#contribute-code for a similarly set up project |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks great, even better if a test passes ;)
it could be that the unit tests (via github actions) do not run at all, in that case maybe to the PR from inside petab-dev/petab, not a fork (not sure if there's a possibility to enable those tests automatically for forks). |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #407 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 77.93% 77.95% +0.01%
===========================================
Files 22 22
Lines 2126 2141 +15
Branches 498 506 +8
===========================================
+ Hits 1657 1669 +12
- Misses 343 345 +2
- Partials 126 127 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Addresses issue #307 (allows a parameter table .tsv file to be split into multiple subset .tsv files).
At the moment, the same parameterId can have definitions in different (or the same) subset files. However, if these definitions for the same parameterId have any differences, then a ValueError will be raised.
Are parameter duplicates handled already?