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

Remove start/stop/step from AnalysisBase kwargs #2505

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Feb 15, 2020

Conversation

IAlibay
Copy link
Member

@IAlibay IAlibay commented Feb 5, 2020

Addresses #1463

Changes made in this Pull Request:

  • Removed support for start, stop, and step keywords on object creation for :class:AnalysisBase and :class:AnalysisFromFunction
  • Where appropriate docstring was changed. If the docstring indicated that start, stop, and step keywords could be passed to __init__ a versionchanged tag was added.

To do:

  • Currently the tests for AnalysisFromFunction don't seem to test out the start/stop arguments very well, it's probably worth adding an extra test there.

PR Checklist

  • Tests?
  • Docs?
  • CHANGELOG updated?
  • Issue raised/referenced?

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Feb 5, 2020

I think that should be everything for AnalysisBase, pinging @orbeckst here as the author of #1463

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 5, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #2505 into develop will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2505   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    90.47%   90.47%           
========================================
  Files          170      170           
  Lines        23091    23091           
  Branches      2980     2980           
========================================
  Hits         20891    20891           
  Misses        1596     1596           
  Partials       604      604

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 7b8bd9d...7b34474. Read the comment docs.

@orbeckst orbeckst changed the title [WIP] Remove start/stop/step from AnalysisBase kwargs Remove start/stop/step from AnalysisBase kwargs Feb 5, 2020
note that start/stop/step in AnalysisBase were deprecated
Copy link
Member

@orbeckst orbeckst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Already looking good but I found a few more — can you please deal with them, too? Thanks!

@orbeckst
Copy link
Member

orbeckst commented Feb 5, 2020

@IAlibay only contacts.q1q2 is strictly part of this PR re: AnalysisBase. I would also be ok with only fixing q1q2 and then opening another issue/PR for harmonizing start/stop/step in non-standard methods with the AnalysisBase model. I leave it up to you and how much time you can spare. Thank you so much for moving the code towards 1.0 — really much appreciated!!

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Feb 5, 2020

@orbeckst thanks for the review 😄

So going by #1463 (comment) my plan was to do all the :class:AnalysisBase changes in this PR and then raise a separate PR for the non-AnalysisBase stuff (I have already started working on the waterdynamics stuff on a separate branch).

Going by #1463 (comment) would you prefer it if I raised the non-AnalysisBase required changes as separate issues or is the dicussion here sufficient?

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Feb 6, 2020

Aside from q1q2, I'll also add the waterdynamics hbonds call to this PR since this directly involves a :class:AnalysisBase method.

A note (to self) here: pytest didn't complain when running test_waterdynamics, and it should have. Extra tests will be needed here.

@orbeckst
Copy link
Member

orbeckst commented Feb 6, 2020

Going by #1463 (comment) would you prefer it if I raised the non-AnalysisBase required changes as separate issues or is the dicussion here sufficient?

Please raise a separate issue, then we can cleanly close this one, and have a new rallying point for new things that might rear their ugly heads. Thanks!

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Feb 7, 2020

Unfortunately encountered #2511 whilst fixing this, it'll need to be fixed before this PR can be tied off.

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member Author

IAlibay commented Feb 13, 2020

With #2520 completed, this should be complete for :class:AnalysisBase

@orbeckst
Copy link
Member

Many thanks @IAlibay !

This should be merged once CI is good.

@richardjgowers richardjgowers merged commit be41c70 into MDAnalysis:develop Feb 15, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
API Component-Analysis Component-Docs deprecation Deprecated functionality to give advance warning for API changes. maintainability
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants