Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

[python] Fix wrong parameters in ExperimentDataPipe #1178

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 5, 2024

Conversation

ebezzi
Copy link
Member

@ebezzi ebezzi commented Jun 4, 2024

Not sure how those ended up there in the first place.

@ebezzi ebezzi requested review from ivirshup and atolopko-czi June 4, 2024 16:43
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 4, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 91.12%. Comparing base (96c0499) to head (d15c98b).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1178   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   91.12%   91.12%           
=======================================
  Files          77       77           
  Lines        5902     5902           
=======================================
  Hits         5378     5378           
  Misses        524      524           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 91.12% <ø> (ø)

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.

@ebezzi ebezzi merged commit d56cf1e into main Jun 5, 2024
15 checks passed
@ebezzi ebezzi deleted the ebezzi/pytorch-fix-wrong-params branch June 5, 2024 17:08
@atolopko-czi
Copy link
Collaborator

atolopko-czi commented Jun 5, 2024

Not sure how those ended up there in the first place.

It was lacking a proper test! 😳 Probably should add one to test the defaults since all of the existing tests explicitly set these two params.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants