Skip to content

Conversation

badasahog
Copy link
Contributor

@badasahog badasahog commented Jul 28, 2025

This is a work-in-progress pr.

For some reason it won't compile (relating to an openmp pragma).

If anyone knows what this is about, I would love to be enlightened.

@badasahog badasahog requested a review from aitap as a code owner July 28, 2025 21:59
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 29, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 98.77%. Comparing base (d875823) to head (71b67cf).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #7226   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.77%   98.77%           
=======================================
  Files          81       81           
  Lines       15241    15241           
=======================================
  Hits        15055    15055           
  Misses        186      186           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@badasahog
Copy link
Contributor Author

I got it to at least compile, but I still don't get why thRead and thPush can't be put in a struct.

A problem for a future pr, I suppose.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 29, 2025

  • HEAD=freadAtimeStruct stopped early for fread(select=list(Date='date')) improved in #6107
  • HEAD=freadAtimeStruct slower P<0.001 for isoweek improved in #7144
    Comparison Plot

Generated via commit 5f3fccd

Download link for the artifact containing the test results: ↓ atime-results.zip

Task Duration
R setup and installing dependencies 4 minutes and 49 seconds
Installing different package versions 9 minutes and 51 seconds
Running and plotting the test cases 2 minutes and 34 seconds

@MichaelChirico
Copy link
Member

I'm not sure I see the point of this change

@badasahog
Copy link
Contributor Author

organization and clarity.

the purpose of an object like tMap isn't obvious, nor is it obvious why it's at function scope.

timestamps.map is much more clear and self documenting.

@badasahog
Copy link
Contributor Author

are you willing to consider merge? or is this DOA?

@MichaelChirico
Copy link
Member

Could you describe how you fixed the race condition issue? It's quite off-putting to evaluate a low-value-add change that touches thread-sensitive code.

@badasahog
Copy link
Contributor Author

I just reverted back to how it was before. This sort of thing is very finnicky, I understand your concern.

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