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: allow renaming when rebuilding dask-awkward Arrays #554

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pfackeldey
Copy link
Collaborator

This follows the implementation of dask.array.Array: https://github.com/dask/dask/blob/main/dask/array/core.py#L1442

With this PR it is possible to dask.graph_manipulation.clone graphs containing dask_awkward.Arrays.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 92.87%. Comparing base (8cb8994) to head (fa6ff9c).
Report is 157 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/dask_awkward/lib/core.py 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #554      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   93.06%   92.87%   -0.20%     
==========================================
  Files          23       22       -1     
  Lines        3290     3395     +105     
==========================================
+ Hits         3062     3153      +91     
- Misses        228      242      +14     

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

@martindurant
Copy link
Collaborator

I am attending pydata global right now, but I'll get to this. I notice that coverage reports that your code isn't touched.

@martindurant
Copy link
Collaborator

It looks like this is ready? It maybe should have an explicit test for rename. The failures are on a nearly-equal that seems to pop up occasionally (based on random input). I don't see why anything here would particularly trigger them; but maybe it would be worth while making the assert-nearly-equal give us more information about what doesn't match, to see if there's something systematic we should fix.

@pfackeldey
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes, it's ready 👍
I'll add a test later, I'm just not sure what you mean with 'assert-nearly-equal'?

@martindurant
Copy link
Collaborator

what you mean with 'assert-nearly-equal'?

I meant calling assert ak.almost_equal within assert_eq_arrays .

...but actually I see that a_comp is all zeros, so something else is going on?

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.

3 participants