-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 132
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
FTheoryTools: Print known properties of G4-fluxes #4422
FTheoryTools: Print known properties of G4-fluxes #4422
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4422 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.34% 84.34% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 663 663
Lines 87788 87805 +17
==========================================
+ Hits 74042 74056 +14
- Misses 13746 13749 +3
|
IMHO, the failure in one jobs seems unrelated to the changes in this PR. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would rename checks: violated to checks: failed, because I think it sounds better, but otherwise looks good
I am certainly open to this. Maybe we can pass this language question to the mother tongue in our team. @apturner what are your thoughts? |
I agree with "checks: failed", that sounds more natural to me. The conditions were violated, and so the checks of those conditions failed. |
b051bc2
to
5c60b6c
Compare
Just updated accordingly. |
Print known properties of G4-fluxes.
Also, improve clarity of expression: "Lacking elementary quantization checks" is currently used to mean "we have not executed those tests". This is misleading. The proposed wording change should be much clearer.
cc @apturner @emikelsons