-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
LAMA to Dask migration: Data.concatenate
#425
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
LAMA to Dask migration: Data.concatenate
#425
Conversation
concatenateData.concatenate
davidhassell
left a comment
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.
Thanks, Sadie - looks good (all wheat, no chaff!). Some suggestions, but only on style and detail.
| # ------------------------------------------------------------ | ||
| return data0 | ||
|
|
||
| def _move_flip_to_partitions(self): |
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.
We can nuke this LAMA-only method.
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.
Sure. Do you think there are any / many more to nuke, since if there are I would prefer to do it another PR for separation of concerns? Otherwise for one (or maybe two) I can nuke them here as suggested.
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.
I don't know, but flake8 should alert us to unused methods. I don't mind if you nuke this here, or there!
| @unittest.skipIf(TEST_DASKIFIED_ONLY, "no attribute '_auxiliary_mask'") | ||
| def test_Data_AUXILIARY_MASK(self): | ||
| def test_Data_concatenate(self): | ||
| if self.test_only and inspect.stack()[0][3] not in self.test_only: |
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.
We can nuke these "test_only" lines now that the tests are so fast.
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.
Can I nuke them all (there's OOM 10-100 still here in the test_Data module) in a separate PR along with the LAMA-only methods, e.g. the above, instead of here, to keep the PR nice and self-contained?
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.
Sure - makes sense (sorry for not thinking of that!)
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.
Not at all, it's good to raise issues as you spot them :) I've noted to do a follow-on PR (after I have put up the stats and concatenate_data PRs).
Co-authored-by: David Hassell <davidhassell@users.noreply.github.com>
davidhassell
left a comment
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.
All good - please merge!
Migrating the
Data.concatenatemethod towards #182.We can ignore the CI job checks since they will fail due on
cfdmcompatibility, i.e. for known reasons unrelated to the PR. Locally, the relevant and updatedtest_Data,pypasses.