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

Converted examples to functional. Made compute_backend name consistent. #105

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mehdiataei
Copy link
Contributor

@mehdiataei mehdiataei commented Jan 16, 2025

Contributing Guidelines

Description

  • Converted examples to functional (except lid-driven cavity, as it has a distributed version that inherits from it)
  • Made compute_backend name consistent

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

  • All pytest tests pass

Linting and Code Formatting

Make sure the code follows the project's linting and formatting standards. This project uses Ruff for linting.

To run Ruff, execute the following command from the root of the repository:

ruff check .
  • Ruff passes

Copy link
Collaborator

@hsalehipour hsalehipour left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please move all function defintion in the examples to the top of the file. Then start all the scripts one after another. Right now, functions and scripts are mixed up together.

@mehdiataei
Copy link
Contributor Author

That is not always possible since we use those calls and values in the following functions. Because this is a script rather than reusable functions, it is completely acceptable to not pass those parameters and instead just use them inside the function.

@mehdiataei
Copy link
Contributor Author

It IS a bad practice (and a linting error) to assume those values will be available in "future" calls. Codes must be well defined if read from top.

@hsalehipour
Copy link
Collaborator

please run ruff format . before merge. Otherwise this PR looks good to me.

@hsalehipour
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR addressed issue #103

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