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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

BUG: Also check for inf in spaxel tool #3368

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

BUG: Also check for inf in spaxel tool #3368

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

pllim
Copy link
Contributor

@pllim pllim commented Dec 19, 2024

Description

This pull request is to fix #3362 .

The fix is so tiny... Do we really need a change log or test here, @rosteen ?

Change log entry

  • Is a change log needed? If yes, is it added to CHANGES.rst? If you want to avoid merge conflicts,
    list the proposed change log here for review and add to CHANGES.rst before merge. If no, maintainer
    should add a no-changelog-entry-needed label.

Checklist for package maintainer(s)

This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainer(s) who will review this pull request of some common things to look for. This list is not exhaustive.

  • Are two approvals required? Branch protection rule does not check for the second approval. If a second approval is not necessary, please apply the trivial label.
  • Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals? Also manually run the affected example notebooks, if necessary.
  • Do the proposed changes follow the STScI Style Guides?
  • Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
  • Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
  • Did the CI pass? If not, are the failures related?
  • Is a milestone set? Set this to bugfix milestone if this is a bug fix and needs to be released ASAP; otherwise, set this to the next major release milestone. Bugfix milestone also needs an accompanying backport label.
  • After merge, any internal documentations need updating (e.g., JIRA, Innerspace)? 🐱

@pllim pllim added bug Something isn't working trivial Only needs one approval instead of two labels Dec 19, 2024
@pllim pllim added this to the 4.1 milestone Dec 19, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added cubeviz plugin Label for plugins common to multiple configurations labels Dec 19, 2024
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 19, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 88.12%. Comparing base (48be154) to head (7b3b9c9).

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3368   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.11%   88.12%           
=======================================
  Files         127      127           
  Lines       19574    19577    +3     
=======================================
+ Hits        17248    17252    +4     
+ Misses       2326     2325    -1

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@rosteen
Copy link
Collaborator

rosteen commented Dec 20, 2024

This might fix the error traceback, but I don't think it results in the behavior that we want. Even if half the spectrum at a given spatial location is NaN, we still want to show the other half. I'm pretty sure this worked before but I don't know what would have changed to break it.

@pllim

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view
@rosteen rosteen added the no-changelog-entry-needed changelog bot directive label Dec 23, 2024
@rosteen
Copy link
Collaborator

rosteen commented Dec 23, 2024

@rosteen good catch, my previous check was flawed. I changed all to any. Does this address your concern? The root of the problem is that the uncert has data that is all inf and it was not caught.

Well, it addresses the last concern, but now the original problem is back ☹️. Seems like any inf makes JSON sad, it doesn't have to be all inf.

@rosteen
Copy link
Collaborator

rosteen commented Dec 23, 2024

Might be helpful to test with this cube: https://stsci.box.com/shared/static/gts87zqt5265msuwi4w5u003b6typ6h0.gz

@pllim
Copy link
Contributor Author

pllim commented Dec 23, 2024

Oops maybe I should have added a test after all. I'll have to look into that when I have time. When I turn that warning into exception, traceback said it was from _profile_viewer.set_limits but I don't see how inf could mess that up. Will have to investigate more. Sorry for wasting your time.

@rosteen rosteen modified the milestones: 4.1, 4.1.1 Dec 23, 2024
@pllim pllim force-pushed the nan-nan-nan-nan-spaxel branch from 10d7270 to 88a619a Compare December 24, 2024 16:14
@pllim
BUG: Also check for inf in spaxel tool
86603a3 
when setting new Y limits
@pllim pllim removed the no-changelog-entry-needed changelog bot directive label Dec 24, 2024
@pllim pllim force-pushed the nan-nan-nan-nan-spaxel branch from 3c1664a to 7b3b9c9 Compare December 24, 2024 16:52
@pllim pllim modified the milestones: 4.1.1, 4.2 Dec 24, 2024
@pllim
Copy link
Contributor Author

pllim commented Dec 24, 2024

Re: test -- I got to the point where I have the code to produce the warning without human interaction on notebook using MANGA.

jdaviz/jdaviz/configs/cubeviz/plugins/tools.py

Line 129 in 48be154

def _mouse_move_worker(self, x, y): 

viewer.toolbar.active_tool = viewer.toolbar.tools['jdaviz:spectrumperspaxel']
viewer.toolbar.active_tool._mouse_move_worker(32, 54)  # something like that

But... the warning only shows up when I am in an interactive notebook session. When I code that into CI test and run it non-interactively, the test refuses to fail even when we turn warning into exception.

So I couldn't add a test to this PR after all.

@pllim pllim removed this from the 4.2 milestone Dec 24, 2024
@pllim pllim added this to the 4.2 milestone Dec 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@rosteen rosteen Awaiting requested review from rosteen rosteen is a code owner

@javerbukh javerbukh Awaiting requested review from javerbukh javerbukh is a code owner

@kecnry kecnry Awaiting requested review from kecnry kecnry is a code owner

@bmorris3 bmorris3 Awaiting requested review from bmorris3 bmorris3 is a code owner

@haticekaratay haticekaratay Awaiting requested review from haticekaratay haticekaratay is a code owner

@cshanahan1 cshanahan1 Awaiting requested review from cshanahan1 cshanahan1 is a code owner

@gibsongreen gibsongreen Awaiting requested review from gibsongreen gibsongreen is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug Something isn't working cubeviz plugin Label for plugins common to multiple configurations trivial Only needs one approval instead of two
Projects
None yet
Milestone
4.2
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] Spectrum-at-spaxel tool raises JSON warnings in uncertainy viewer
2 participants
@pllim @rosteen