You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
PR #6 addressed some inconsistencies w.r.t. the units of input kwargs vs. the units of the resulting simulation cell. However, the existing unit tests were still passing with the inconsistent units. After the fix, it was found that tests would not pass with density=1, whereas density=0.8 works.
To enhance robustness, we should add more comprehensive unit testing of the simulation cell size in test_generators.py to ensure that we are getting the expected size box from certain keyword arguments, and that tests fail when this is not the case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
PR #6 addressed some inconsistencies w.r.t. the units of input kwargs vs. the units of the resulting simulation cell. However, the existing unit tests were still passing with the inconsistent units. After the fix, it was found that tests would not pass with
density=1
, whereasdensity=0.8
works.To enhance robustness, we should add more comprehensive unit testing of the simulation cell size in
test_generators.py
to ensure that we are getting the expected size box from certain keyword arguments, and that tests fail when this is not the case.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: