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

longitude_slicer is not being covered by any test #118

Open
navidcy opened this issue Feb 29, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

longitude_slicer is not being covered by any test #118

navidcy opened this issue Feb 29, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@navidcy
Copy link
Contributor

navidcy commented Feb 29, 2024

https://app.codecov.io/gh/COSIMA/regional-mom6/blob/main/regional_mom6%2Fregional_mom6.py#L78

Given its complexity we should have at least a simple test to test this.

@navidcy navidcy changed the title nicer_slicer is not being coverered by any test longitude_slicer is not being covered by any test Mar 13, 2024
@ashjbarnes
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixed by Navid's longitude slicer test in #112

@navidcy
Copy link
Contributor Author

navidcy commented Mar 27, 2024

You probably meant to say #125

But, truth is that the test doesn't really test anything. Only asserts that longitude_slicer spits out an AssertionError. So I'm reopening this to remind us to add a test that really tests to ensure that longitude_slicer does what it claims it do.

@navidcy navidcy reopened this Mar 27, 2024
@navidcy
Copy link
Contributor Author

navidcy commented Apr 23, 2024

@ashjbarnes could you give me an example here for a case where the longitude_slicer should take care of the seam?

like... data with lon in [-180, 180] and then ask for

longitude_slicer(data, (150, 200), 'lon')

??

I'm trying to make a test and I'm finding the longitude_slicer to not work as expected. But there is a good chance I am expecting it to work differently from what it does, so a clarification would be helpful.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants