Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Issue 385: flexibility with running strict unit validation #393

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 29, 2024

Conversation

fbergmann
Copy link
Member

Description

This PR adds the strict unit validator to the options, so it can be run using checkConsistency. Additionally it adds an override flag to checkConsistencyWithStrictUnits, so that callers can decide as to the status of unit issues.

The PR is written so that the behavior with it is the same as before:

  • callers have to explicitly enable StrictUnitsCheckON with setConsistencyChecks for it to be run with checkConsistency
  • the test shows the behavior of both modes

Motivation and Context

fixes #385

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Change in documentation

Checklist:

  • I have updated all documentation necessary.
  • I have checked spelling in (new) comments.

Testing

  • Testing is done automatically and codecov shows test coverage
  • This cannot be tested automatically

@fbergmann fbergmann requested a review from skeating August 27, 2024 07:54
@skeating skeating merged commit 2ef3a2a into development Aug 29, 2024
35 checks passed
@skeating skeating deleted the issue-385 branch August 29, 2024 09:00
@matthiaskoenig
Copy link

Thanks. This is great.

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.

checkConsistencyWithStrictUnits reports Units issues as Errors not Warnings
3 participants