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

[F2C] refactoring cgen and *c-like* codegen #280

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

MichaelSt98
Copy link
Collaborator

and introducing c-like codegen (cppgen', 'cudagen)

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 9, 2024

Documentation for this branch can be viewed at https://sites.ecmwf.int/docs/loki/280/index.html

@MichaelSt98 MichaelSt98 force-pushed the nams_cgen_cppgen_cudagen branch from 2d08a77 to 962528e Compare April 10, 2024 07:33
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 10, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 96.96970% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 92.89%. Comparing base (5772340) to head (962528e).
Report is 438 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
loki/backend/cgen.py 97.10% 2 Missing ⚠️
loki/backend/cudagen.py 94.59% 2 Missing ⚠️
loki/backend/cppgen.py 98.11% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #280      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   92.82%   92.89%   +0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          98      104       +6     
  Lines       18053    18250     +197     
==========================================
+ Hits        16757    16953     +196     
- Misses       1296     1297       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
lint_rules 96.39% <ø> (ø)
loki 92.86% <96.96%> (+0.06%) ⬆️
transformations 92.20% <ø> (+0.19%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@reuterbal
Copy link
Collaborator

This PR should be made redundant by #328, right?

@MichaelSt98
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This PR should be made redundant by #328, right?

That is correct, yes!

@reuterbal reuterbal closed this Sep 5, 2024
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