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

update acisfp_check for acis_thermal_check 3.0 #21

Merged
merged 19 commits into from
Apr 13, 2020

Conversation

jzuhone
Copy link
Member

@jzuhone jzuhone commented Apr 7, 2020

Description

This PR implements an update to achieve compatibility with acis_thermal_check version 3.0 (PR acisops/acis_thermal_check#25). In essence, it does the following:

  1. Subclasses ACISThermalCheck to ACISFPCheck and stores all of the information specific to the ACIS FP model inside this class, such as validation limits, histogram limits, etc.
  2. calc_model becomes the _calc_model_supp method which overrides a stub in the ACISThermalCheck class. This is designed to put the common model functionality in the super class and allow for model-specific customizations to be carried out in this method.
  3. Command-line arguments are now passed to the run method instead of the class __init__.
  4. Incorporates the new acis_thermal_check testing machinery and stores answers inside the package
  5. Fixed a bug where maneuver obsids were sometimes appearing in temperature checks

Testing

  • Passes unit tests on MacOS, linux
  • Functional testing

Copy link

@jazan12 jazan12 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not so sure about parsing the .rst syntax, but looked through all the coding and no objections here.

@jzuhone jzuhone merged commit 7d6da79 into acisops:master Apr 13, 2020
@javierggt javierggt mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2020
17 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants