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

Enabling aqua ambiguity testing for Turing #2290

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

abhinavsns
Copy link
Contributor

We can test ambiguities only for Turing and not its dependencies.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 18, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 56.72%. Comparing base (0c4096a) to head (03ce9e5).

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2290       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   85.77%   56.72%   -29.06%     
===========================================
  Files          24       24               
  Lines        1617     1606       -11     
===========================================
- Hits         1387      911      -476     
- Misses        230      695      +465     

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

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Jul 18, 2024

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 10160622494

Details

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • 460 unchanged lines in 13 files lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-28.9%) to 57.044%

Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
src/mcmc/emcee.jl 2 90.2%
src/variational/VariationalInference.jl 4 14.29%
src/mcmc/gibbs.jl 4 94.05%
src/mcmc/particle_mcmc.jl 10 87.84%
src/mcmc/gibbs_conditional.jl 12 0.0%
src/mcmc/Inference.jl 18 77.3%
ext/TuringDynamicHMCExt.jl 29 0.0%
src/mcmc/mh.jl 32 57.43%
ext/TuringOptimExt.jl 50 0.0%
src/variational/advi.jl 53 0.0%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 10159410664: -28.9%
Covered Lines: 911
Relevant Lines: 1597

💛 - Coveralls

@devmotion
Copy link
Member

Indeed, that's what I suggested in #2257 (comment). Maybe put it in a testset and maybe only test ambiguities on Julia >= 1.10 (or some other recent Julia versions) since it might not be worth it fixing ambiguities that only show up in old Julia versions (which sometimes also imply old dependencies)?

We test ambiguities only for Turing and not its dependencies.
@penelopeysm
Copy link
Collaborator

penelopeysm commented Jul 30, 2024

(Rebased against master to check if #2294 works. Edit: It doesn't, probably because this is a public fork (see https://docs.github.com/en/actions/security-guides/automatic-token-authentication#how-the-permissions-are-calculated-for-a-workflow-job). Will manually fix this one and revisit that separately.)

@yebai
Copy link
Member

yebai commented Aug 14, 2024

Close in favour of #2304

@yebai yebai closed this Aug 14, 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.

None yet

5 participants