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

fix(api): made a mistake in math when i removed the isclose check #15913

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 7, 2024

Conversation

ryanthecoder
Copy link
Contributor

Overview

Should have realized it was wrong when I had to change the test

Test Plan and Hands on Testing

Changelog

Review requests

Risk assessment

@ryanthecoder ryanthecoder requested a review from a team as a code owner August 7, 2024 14:13
@sfoster1 sfoster1 changed the base branch from edge to chore_release-8.0.0 August 7, 2024 14:28
@sfoster1 sfoster1 requested review from a team as code owners August 7, 2024 14:28
@sfoster1 sfoster1 requested review from smb2268 and removed request for a team August 7, 2024 14:28
<!--
Thanks for taking the time to open a Pull Request (PR)! Please make sure
you've read the "Opening Pull Requests" section of our Contributing
Guide:


https://github.com/Opentrons/opentrons/blob/edge/CONTRIBUTING.md#opening-pull-requests

GitHub provides robust markdown to format your PR. Links, diagrams,
pictures, and videos along with text formatting make it possible to
create a rich and informative PR. For more information on GitHub
markdown, see:


https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/writing-on-github/getting-started-with-writing-and-formatting-on-github/basic-writing-and-formatting-syntax

To ensure your code is reviewed quickly and thoroughly, please fill out
the sections below to the best of your ability!
-->

# Overview

We had a few math buts in lld: 
we had a rounding error in the control loop that created an infinite
loop. the two values should have been equal and therefor failed the <
compare but due to python rounding we need to check with isclose,

second we were calculating our max_d_distance from the
safe_plunger_position instead of the pass_start_position

<!--
Describe your PR at a high level. State acceptance criteria and how this
PR fits into other work. Link issues, PRs, and other relevant resources.
-->

## Test Plan and Hands on Testing

<!--
Describe your testing of the PR. Emphasize testing not reflected in the
code. Attach protocols, logs, screenshots and any other assets that
support your testing.
-->

## Changelog

<!--
List changes introduced by this PR considering future developers and the
end user. Give careful thought and clear documentation to breaking
changes.
-->

## Review requests

<!--
- What do you need from reviewers to feel confident this PR is ready to
merge?
- Ask questions.
-->

## Risk assessment

<!--
- Indicate the level of attention this PR needs.
- Provide context to guide reviewers.
- Discuss trade-offs, coupling, and side effects.
- Look for the possibility, even if you think it's small, that your
change may affect some other part of the system.
- For instance, changing return tip behavior may also change the
behavior of labware calibration.
- How do your unit tests and on hands on testing mitigate this PR's
risks and the risk of future regressions?
- Especially in high risk PRs, explain how you know your testing is
enough.
-->

---------

Co-authored-by: caila-marashaj <[email protected]>
@ryanthecoder ryanthecoder merged commit fe6252c into chore_release-8.0.0 Aug 7, 2024
42 of 43 checks passed
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