Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: -14.10 ⚠️

Comparison is base (94d288f) 85.92% compared to head (bd8019a) 71.82%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           develop     #293       +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage    85.92%   71.82%   -14.10%     
============================================
  Files           23       22        -1     
  Lines         6081     5793      -288     
============================================
- Hits          5225     4161     -1064     
- Misses         856     1632      +776     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

• @atztogo you have copyright of niggli.c and it said to be part of a different project, so I have to ask your approval for [32bae2b]. Generally I avoid including code from project to project and then editing it, and when I do copy around and have full copyright, I tend to remove and migrate the copyright to avoid such confusions

It's perfectly no problem. My aim was to make it a stand alone routine. I should do like you wrote. We can migrate the copyright.

Thanks for the clarification. I should leave that commit to you. You can simply pull my branch and push directly to it.

What's the deal with c2efc49? Those functions are not used anywhere. Is it for future implementation, in which case it should be moved to a separate file, and be marked for experimental builds

If it is who I wrote, I think it can be removed.

Thanks for the clarification. I should leave that commit to you. You can simply pull my branch and push directly to it.

Sorry for bothering you. How can I do it concretely?

What's the deal with c2efc49? Those functions are not used anywhere. Is it for future implementation, in which case it should be moved to a separate file, and be marked for experimental builds

If it is who I wrote, I think it can be removed.

It goes all the way back to "First commit on github" 10 year ago:

Sorry for bothering you. How can I do it concretely?

No problem at all:

Assuming you push using ssh, otherwise change it to https
$ git remote add LecrisUT git@github.com:LecrisUT/spglib.git
$ git fetch LecrisUT
$ git checkout LecrisUT/debug-warnings
Edit to your heart's content
$ vi src/niggli.c
Then do the usual
$ git commit -s
Now just specify my remote instead of origin
$ git push LecrisUT

It goes all the way back to "First commit on github" 10 year ago:

Then, it's definitely me. Let's remove it. Spglib was born in Aachen more than 10 years ago.

Thanks for your instruction about git.

@LecrisUT, thanks for all of these improvements.

Actually I was looking at the debug in the tests and I find the debug messages too spamy to be useful to navigate so I want to get your opinion about it (not for this PR). Have you used the breakpoint debugger in VSCode? Do you find it more useful than the manual printing? I find that the usage of all of the debug_print and warning_print are equivalent with what you achieve with breakpoint debugger, and if these can be eliminated in favor of the latter, it will make debugging of the test cases much more manageable.

Of course I am happy to move to the modern world!

When I started to learn C, google didn't exist.

Great, just wanted to make sure if it's not part of a developer's active setup, and if it is, if they need some help setting up the IDE debugger to work around it. I will leave it to @lan496 to merge this one after he's caught up with the discussion.