-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 514
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
Implement Covering Arrays #35008
Implement Covering Arrays #35008
Conversation
with a few initial methods: is_covering_array and the init method, as well as that give its size n and k, its parameters t and v, and an ordering based on the lexicographic ordering of each row.
with a few initial methods: is_covering_array and the init method, as well as that give its size n and k, its parameters t and v, and an ordering based on the lexicographic ordering of each row.
…first push so put it in new branch
…me of which are not yet working
…age into t/34279/coveringarrays
use of specific symbol sets for CAs instead of just their size.
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #35008 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 88.57% 88.58% +0.01%
===========================================
Files 2140 2141 +1
Lines 397273 397478 +205
===========================================
+ Hits 351891 352124 +233
+ Misses 45382 45354 -28
... and 32 files with indirect coverage changes Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
…into t/34279/coveringarrays
- in .symbolset if we don't specify symbols set on init - in .strength if we pass it strength 3 CA
added two doctests:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll look at it tomorrow
To make the second change I could change the function back to using tuple_dictionary and then check its values to ensure they all have multiplicity >v before iterating. Do you think this is more or less efficient than using existing_combinations and checking its size, but missing on this smarter iteration? |
Covering array
I will add examples to the covering_array.py file in my next merge but the rest of the smaller suggestions have been implemented. |
|
There seems to be a problem with the documentation
(see CI report) |
loop of the is_CA function into cases where t is inputted and is not, so to have better iteration and better stopping
Covering array
Covering array
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit 74c1b34; changes) is ready! 🎉 |
Although the checks are still not successful, it seems to me that the errors come from the develop branch. That being said, is there anything else that must be changed about this pull request for it to be accepted? |
our CI, and the latest beta, are in a mess right now, due to a not too well-tested switch to Cython 3. |
DIma, |
as soon as I have the latest beta working locally, I'll have a look |
Fixes #34279