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

updates to align more with DM guide + black 25 updates #443

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

humnaawan
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@humnaawan humnaawan force-pushed the tickets/SP-1695 branch 5 times, most recently from cc8dc5d to 77e1631 Compare February 14, 2025 15:44
Copy link
Member

@rhiannonlynne rhiannonlynne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks fine, but I'd like you to test if the scimaf_dir script actually works.
In case you're not quite sure how to do that, once you are on this branch of your pip installed (with "-e") rubin_sim, you can navigate to any directory with an opsim database and just run scimaf_dir --db <database filename>.

@@ -542,7 +542,7 @@ def order_plots(self, sky_plots):
# that do NOT match original _*_ pattern.
pattern = "_[ugrizy]_"
nonmatches = np.array([bool(re.search(pattern, x)) for x in sky_plots["plot_file"]])
nonmatch_sky_plots = sky_plots[nonmatches == False]
nonmatch_sky_plots = sky_plots[not nonmatches]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Have you happened to run this script on this branch?
I don't usually do that, but I am concerned that this may not work and perhaps should instead be
nonmatch_sky_plots = sky_plots[~nonmatches]
.. but I'm not 100% sure which is why I think testing it might be the way to go.
I don't think the unit test actually runs the script.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hi @rhiannonlynne i am not familiar with scimaf_dir but i ran it in a folder with a copy of the v4.1 baseline. the script ran for at least a few hours and im not sure how long the whole is supposed to take for me to check what you've suggested (and im assuming it actually has to finish and im still waiting on that).

also, i dont see a connection between scimaf_dir and maf_run_results so im not sure how running scimaf_dir is testing the script.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

okay indeed scimaf_dir didnt check the code - but it produced the file needed to run run_maf which did check the code. i got a 404 error with the change so ive pushed a fix now.

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.

2 participants