Skip to content
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

Changes to scale.py and writer.py to support scaling methods. #290

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sandip-shah
Copy link

Based on this - scikit-image/scikit-image#4294
multichannel=False nees to be changed to channel_axis=None on lines 190 & 201.

In writer.py line 885
mip = scaler.nearest(image)
should be
mip = getattr(scaler, scaler.method)(image)
(else it always calls the 'nearest' scale method).

@will-moore
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the contribution.
It looks like usage of channel_axis requires https://github.com/scikit-image/scikit-image/releases/tag/v0.20.0 so this would require updating the dependency?

Other change looks good...
Running tests now...

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 10, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 42.30% and project coverage change: -0.75 ⚠️

Comparison is base (c31e032) 84.84% compared to head (d775770) 84.10%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #290      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.84%   84.10%   -0.75%     
==========================================
  Files          13       13              
  Lines        1485     1510      +25     
==========================================
+ Hits         1260     1270      +10     
- Misses        225      240      +15     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
ome_zarr/scale.py 69.40% <ø> (ø)
ome_zarr/utils.py 79.80% <23.52%> (-11.00%) ⬇️
ome_zarr/cli.py 87.35% <75.00%> (-1.26%) ⬇️
ome_zarr/writer.py 95.27% <100.00%> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@sandip-shah
Copy link
Author

Yes, you are right. It would require updating the dependency.

Pardon my ignorance here - but how does this work? Do you want me to specify the dependencies (in environment.yml and setup.py, and maybe requirements) in the PR?

Since both the changes are tied with each other, we may have to do that?

Thanks,

Sandip

@will-moore
Copy link
Member

Hi - apologies for my delayed response (been away)...
Yes, please update setup.py, and it may be worth doing environment.yml too, although that's less critical as it's usually installing the latest versions of everything each time (rather than updating), and the tests that use it are passing.

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.

2 participants