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 inference problems in read_header #78

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2020
Merged

Conversation

timholy
Copy link
Member

@timholy timholy commented Nov 2, 2020

This eliminates 198 invalidations from using CategoricalArrays.

This eliminates 198 invalidations from `using CategoricalArrays`.
@timholy
Copy link
Member Author

timholy commented Nov 2, 2020

CC @nalimilan

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 2, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #78 into master will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 83.33%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master      #78   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.67%   95.68%           
=======================================
  Files           4        4           
  Lines         578      579    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits          553      554    +1     
  Misses         25       25           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/extract.jl 95.18% <83.33%> (+0.01%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 853aa7f...2e14c04. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@nalimilan nalimilan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@StefanKarpinski StefanKarpinski merged commit ba88678 into master Nov 2, 2020
@StefanKarpinski StefanKarpinski deleted the teh/inval branch November 2, 2020 13:58
@StefanKarpinski
Copy link
Member

I'm guessing this needs a Base bump to be be useful? (And possibly a new release.)

@timholy
Copy link
Member Author

timholy commented Nov 2, 2020

Yep.

@StefanKarpinski
Copy link
Member

I'll do the base bump first and then if that goes through fine, I can tag a new release at that commit.

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