-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 270
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
Consistent overwrite #2213
Consistent overwrite #2213
Conversation
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.
Now this could be a function ...
- Remove all -f aliases - Check for conflict on setup - rename infile/outfile to input_path/output_path
- Make `overwrite` a flag on `Tool` - Check that output files do not exist or overwrite is turned on
8ec3616
to
f0f0d89
Compare
- Use check_output in dump_trigger aswell - Dont require a list of files - Skip None files, removing the check from the train* tools
- Tools now only have --overwrite
- Since Tool now has overwrite, we can use that directly in the tools. - It is only defined explicitly if the default behaviour has to be overwritten
With the newest changes I think we would benefit from a test, checking that overwriting works explicitly. |
@@ -98,18 +97,7 @@ def setup(self): | |||
self.cross_validate = CrossValidator( | |||
parent=self, model_component=self.regressor | |||
) | |||
self.rng = np.random.default_rng(self.random_seed) |
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.
This line should have stayed, review missed it and no tests for n_events
I guess that would be an API change since we remove a flag from some tools?