refactor: use a more flexible interface to utilize diffpy.srfit - #31
refactor: use a more flexible interface to utilize diffpy.srfit#31ycexiao wants to merge 12 commits into
diffpy.srfit#31Conversation
| ) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def test_refinement_session(): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sbillinge Could you please review the function signatures we have now? If there aren't any issues, I'll continue working on making the tests pass.
sbillinge
left a comment
sbillinge
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this seems like a good start. It is a bit hard to know what else we will need until we start using it (or the agent does)
|
|
||
| def test_refine_sine(): | ||
| # C1: Refinement session without additional calculator or functions | ||
| session = RefinementSession() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sbillinge Please see this new interaction logic with ParametricModel.
I thought it couldn't be more straightforward and simpler. But if it could, could you please add some pseudo-code here so I can implement it?
| ni_model.parameters["ni_model.s"].value = 1.0 | ||
|
|
||
| session = RefinementSession() | ||
| session.solve( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
constraints have not been implemented, so value check is not added.
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #31 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 94.14% 96.30% +2.15%
==========================================
Files 5 8 +3
Lines 188 298 +110
==========================================
+ Hits 177 287 +110
Misses 11 11
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
3 participants
What problem does this PR address?
Use a more flexible interface to utilize
diffpy.srfitWhat should the reviewer(s) do?