Skip to content

Fix axpy! function to use PArrays methods#191

Merged
JordiManyer merged 3 commits intogridap:check_partition_allocate_residualfrom
lisavdlinde:check_partition_allocate_residual
Feb 18, 2026
Merged

Fix axpy! function to use PArrays methods#191
JordiManyer merged 3 commits intogridap:check_partition_allocate_residualfrom
lisavdlinde:check_partition_allocate_residual

Conversation

@lisavdlinde
Copy link

No description provided.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 18, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 0.00%. Comparing base (5b109dd) to head (ea7520e).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on check_partition_allocate_residual.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/Algebra.jl 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@                        Coverage Diff                        @@
##           check_partition_allocate_residual    #191   +/-   ##
=================================================================
  Coverage                               0.00%   0.00%           
=================================================================
  Files                                     15      15           
  Lines                                   3998    3998           
=================================================================
  Misses                                  3998    3998           
Flag Coverage Δ
mpi 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
sequential 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@JordiManyer JordiManyer merged commit 705ce36 into gridap:check_partition_allocate_residual Feb 18, 2026
5 checks passed
@JordiManyer
Copy link
Member

Thank you for the fix @lisavdlinde !

@JordiManyer
Copy link
Member

Wait I though this was going directly to master. Any reason why we are merging it directly? It seems like a well contained fix.

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.

2 participants