-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
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 nbval testing failures due to new 0.10 release #251
Conversation
Check out this pull request on See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks. Powered by ReviewNB |
Should I close this? |
I have no context for this fix, is it still a necessary change in your opinion? |
Well, this was done to fix #248 and #249, and back then it worked (IDK why it's failing right now). The nbval bug that caused this is still there by the way. |
Ok, yeah it looks like this fix is still necessary. If you have the capacity to work out why things are failing now then that'd be great. Please go ahead and ping the whole coredevs group when you need a review (I don't spend a lot of time looking at this repo unfortunately). (#250 was just a temporary fix so I could get a release out) |
@MDAnalysis/coredevs Done! No big changes here. Just sanitizing notebooks* so nbval tests pass without the need of pinning it to an older version. *: that is, adding regex expressions so outputs that necessarily vary from execution to execution (eg: data structures' memory locations) don't make nbval fail spuriously. |
doc/source/examples/analysis/alignment_and_rms/aligning_trajectory_to_frame.ipynb
Show resolved
Hide resolved
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.
Thanks @pgbarletta for getting on this. Looks good, just a suggestion: ax = ps.plot(...)
should still show the plot, I think, but with a much smaller output.
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.
LGTM!
Sorry for all the conflicts...
Yeah, do you know why they showed up all of a sudden? |
I'm guessing because I merged #256 -- the widget states might be conflicting? |
ah, right, it's gotta be that. |
Just saw the review request - apologies @pgbarletta I'm kinda checked out of userguide things for the time being. I'm leaving it up to @lilyminium to take this towards a merge. |
@pgbarletta are you up for fixing the merge conflicts? Otherwise this PR is good to go :) |
Done! Removed all the widget attributes. |
Thanks so much for this @pgbarletta! |
From #248 and #249
For now, I removed all semicolons that were used to silence cell outputs and added the necessary additional sanitize statements on
tests/sanitize_output.cfg
One small drawback is that for now I can't silence this ugly plots: