8000 WIP: Switch to PyTest by mandli · Pull Request #642 · clawpack/geoclaw · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

WIP: Switch to PyTest #642

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

Draft
wants to merge 91 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

WIP: Switch to PyTest #642

wants to merge 91 commits into from

Conversation

mandli
Copy link
Member
@mandli mandli commented Apr 22, 2025

A clean attempt at switch the tests over to PyTest. Also moves the tests out of a dedicated directory and aligns each with an example, modifying only what needs to be modified.

Currently Broken Tests

Will update this list as I go to update what is and is not working.

  • Example regression tests:
    • Bowl Slosh the fgmax test is failing, gauge test is passing.
    • dtopo is failing, but if I recall, this started before the switch
    • Multilayer was not compiling - fixed by adding a flag to the Makefile to support linux linking to LAPACK.
    • Storm surge Ike test - is working but there is a bug in how gauges are recorded that is holding up creating new regression data
    • Particles test - regression data differs from output but test data looks fine
    • Chile 2010 Adjoint test - works but forward does not match regression data
  • Python tests:
    • Storm tests

@mandli mandli self-assigned this Apr 22, 2025
@mandli mandli changed the title Switch to PyTest WIP: Switch to PyTest Apr 22, 2025
@mandli mandli marked this pull request as draft April 22, 2025 14:03
@mandli
Copy link
Member Author
mandli commented May 18, 2025

There are commits that should be merged in other repositories before this may work:

@rjleveque
Copy link
Member
rjleveque commented May 24, 2025

PR #649 suggests merging that one before this, but I think #649 has problems (see the discussion there), so perhaps the regression data needs to be updated in this PR?

@mandli
Copy link
Member Author
mandli commented May 25, 2025

Yeah, we can update the regression data when necessary.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants
0