Skip to content

Conversation

@jcass11
Copy link
Collaborator

@jcass11 jcass11 commented Dec 2, 2024

Purpose

I took a stab at addressing the recommendations @chantelleleveille and I made in @cfrick13 's density branch PR. I am making a PR into his original branch with the hopes of having handled most of the edits needed to clear bandwidth for Chris. I completed this in a separate branch so that if I misinterpreted what Chris was trying to do or he doesn't like my edits is easy to change before affecting his branch.

Edits

  • Removed references to old density and old filtering
  • Added the new workflows for panels of Fig 3 and SFig S4 to be called within the figure_3_s4_workflow, so they are all one workflow
  • Import updates (removing unused imports and fixing broken ones, which also fixes the mypy test that was failing on the original density branch)
  • Removed commented code
  • Used the example tracks dictionary

Testing

  • ✅ Ran the new figure_3_s4_workflow first - which now includes all workflows related to these figures - which succeeded
  • ✅ Ran run_all_manuscript_workflows

What didn't I address here that was part of the original density PR?

I didn't touch removing the actual old denisty features themselves, just the references to them. There were also a huge number of new features added in the density_fig_updates PR and I didn't feel prepared to decide how to pate that down. So @cfrick13 that will still need to be done with updates to your PR not covered here.

@jcass11 jcass11 changed the title Suggested edits to address Julie and Chantelle's reviews of density branch Suggested edits to address Julie and Chantelle's reviews of Chris' density branch Dec 2, 2024
@jcass11 jcass11 changed the title Suggested edits to address Julie and Chantelle's reviews of Chris' density branch Suggested edits to address suggested edits in reviews of Chris' density branch Dec 2, 2024
@jcass11 jcass11 changed the title Suggested edits to address suggested edits in reviews of Chris' density branch Suggested edits to address reviews of Chris' density branch Dec 2, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@chantelleleveille chantelleleveille left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice :) Thanks for doing that!

@chantelleleveille
Copy link
Collaborator

@cfrick13 @jcass11 If it would be easier to address newly added columns in its own PR after adding the new workflows I would be okay with that!

@jcass11
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jcass11 commented Dec 3, 2024

@cfrick13 @jcass11 If it would be easier to address newly added columns in its own PR after adding the new workflows I would be okay with that!

Fine with me!

Copy link
Contributor

@cfrick13 cfrick13 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we may want to keep the test_voronoi.py file. This was not added by me. I think it is one of the tests written to validate the voronoi tesslation distance measurment which is useful for the toymodel.

@jcass11 jcass11 merged commit 3745e99 into density_fig_updates Dec 4, 2024
1 check passed
@jcass11 jcass11 deleted the density_julie branch December 4, 2024 17:53
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.

4 participants