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

Adding another effective area weighting test #53

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 20, 2025
Merged

Conversation

jsaffer
Copy link
Collaborator

@jsaffer jsaffer commented Feb 20, 2025

Adding a test for the weighted version of effective area with a lambda function for an E^-2.7 spectrum. Note the pdgid necessary for get_weights()

Adding a test for the weighted version of effective area with a lambda function for an E^-2.7 spectrum. Note the pdgid necessary for get_weights()
@jsaffer jsaffer requested a review from kjmeagher February 20, 2025 22:01
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 20, 2025

Test Results

    6 files  ±0      6 suites  ±0   2m 41s ⏱️ -5s
  638 tests ±0    413 ✅ ±0    225 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
3 828 runs  ±0  2 476 ✅ ±0  1 352 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 5b05746. ± Comparison against base commit 0c31d7a.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 20, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (0c31d7a) to head (5b05746).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main       #53   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           12        12           
  Lines          813       813           
=========================================
  Hits           813       813           

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

For the test of weighted effective area, I want to use lambda functions. The calculation of the integral of the flux demands a pdgid argument which however is actually not needed for a primary-independent flux weighting. So pdgid needs to be defined as argument of the flux function but not used which usually ruff would complain about.
I hope it's okay when I ignore ARG005
@kjmeagher kjmeagher merged commit bedd1c5 into main Feb 20, 2025
13 checks passed
@kjmeagher kjmeagher deleted the Aeff_weighting_test branch February 20, 2025 23:02
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