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

All_compare test: Expect "true" on single process #3677

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 21, 2020

Conversation

hirschsn
Copy link
Contributor

The all_compare test checks if all_compare correctly returns false if supplied with different values. This, however, only holds true if the test is called with more than one processes.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 21, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #3677 into python will decrease coverage by 0%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           python   #3677   +/-   ##
======================================
- Coverage      87%     87%   -1%     
======================================
  Files         536     536           
  Lines       22756   22756           
======================================
- Hits        20012   20010    -2     
- Misses       2744    2746    +2     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/utils/tests/all_compare_test.cpp 100% <100%> (ø)
src/core/particle_data.cpp 96% <0%> (-1%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 9d5c510...79851e5. Read the comment docs.

@fweik fweik added automerge Merge with kodiak BugFix Core labels Apr 21, 2020
@fweik
Copy link
Contributor

fweik commented Apr 21, 2020

Thanks!

@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit ae36c6f into espressomd:python Apr 21, 2020
@jngrad jngrad added this to the Espresso 4.1.3 milestone Apr 21, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants