-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Added Zip operation and Sample operation #26
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #26 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.29% 97.36% +0.06%
==========================================
Files 22 26 +4
Lines 628 682 +54
==========================================
+ Hits 611 664 +53
- Misses 17 18 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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 think the doxygen comment should be added. I have already provide some skeleton code for you, please double check it and add additional description if needed.
using V1 = utils::RddElementType<R1>; | ||
using V2 = utils::RddElementType<R2>; | ||
|
||
constexpr ZippedRdd(const R1& prev1, const R2& prev2) : Base{prev1, false} { |
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.
Shall we unify the name convention? Currently, it looks like some Rdd's are named in the present tense (Sample, Merge), and some are named in the past tense (Zipped, Transformed).
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 think it is a relatively minor issue. But if any of you are available, it does not hurt to rename them to past tense.
It is strange that one of the lines in the TEST script didn't get covered, because they are the ones we used to test other headers. |
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 for finishing sampe_rdd
and zipped_rdd
. Commented some minor issues. You can take a look of them if you have time. If you are busy, feel free to take care of them in the future.
using V1 = utils::RddElementType<R1>; | ||
using V2 = utils::RddElementType<R2>; | ||
|
||
constexpr ZippedRdd(const R1& prev1, const R2& prev2) : Base{prev1, false} { |
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 think it is a relatively minor issue. But if any of you are available, it does not hurt to rename them to past tense.
For the Google Test script, the line that didn't get covered is for the SampleRdd operation with fraction = 0, which means the returned Rdd should contain nothing, thus the program won't get in the loop body for Rdd and I guess that's the reason for not being covered. And because of the random feature, the only deterministic case I could test in Google test script is fraction = 1 and fraction = 0. For other random sample cases, I present them in the ./examples directory. |
Co-authored-by: Alex_XU <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex_XU <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex_XU <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex_XU <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex_XU <[email protected]>
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.
Thank you for your effort!
Files modified:
Files added: