Repository navigation
Test iterable edge inputs in solid fillet and chamfer - #2107
RanaPriyansh wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
|
Merged current master and completed fresh sequential Linux validation. The macOS baseline still has the recorded Codex used. |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2107 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 95.81% 95.81%
=======================================
Files 30 30
Lines 9603 9603
Branches 1442 1442
=======================================
Hits 9201 9201
Misses 247 247
Partials 155 155 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
Marked ready for review after upstream cross-platform validation. Older Azure check record Codex used. |
|
The current master integration is now validated on GitHub Actions run 39437319607 for merged source Codex used. |
CadQuery's direct solid fillet and chamfer methods need regression coverage for iterable edge inputs. Add list and one-use generator cases for both methods, including asymmetric chamfer distances, independent volume checks, valid output geometry, and unchanged input solids. Preserve the upstream Shape-input cases.
The merged source
9cc9cf276b9af838fc3da453167bdbd2f4a82112, based on master33361dc1b5b70bc83ce36f1b34a01ca85dfca80a, passed sequential Linux validation on GitHub Actions run 39437319607. The unchanged master baseline passed 900 tests and skipped three. The candidate passed 906 tests and skipped three. Both upstream Shape-input cases and all six iterable-input cases passed. Both phases passed the complete Black and Mypy checks and recorded 63 warnings. Their dependency inventories matched: 378 Conda packages and 110 pip distributions, with only the editable CadQuery path changed.The earlier local macOS baseline volume failure in
test_interpPlateremains documented. This Linux run does not resolve that separate limitation.Codex used.