Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

lukas-paetow
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 6, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 81.72%. Comparing base (04b73bb) to head (082cc08).
⚠️ Report is 13 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
cclib/parser/serenityparser.py 0.00% 8 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1673      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.02%   81.72%   -0.30%     
==========================================
  Files          75       75              
  Lines       15914    15973      +59     
==========================================
+ Hits        13053    13054       +1     
- Misses       2861     2919      +58     

☔ 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.

Copy link
Member

@berquist berquist left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I also think now is a good time to start adding tests (in general). Let us know if anything in the documentation isn't complete or clear: in this PR or the original issue is fine.

self.append_attribute("dispersionenergies", float(line.split()[3]))

if "Total Local-CCSD Energy" in line:
self.set_attribute("ccenergies", float(line.split()[3]))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe these should all be append_attribute instead because of https://cclib.github.io/data_notes.html#ccenergies, but you will need to do some work to only keep the "best" value: for example, overwrite the parsed CCSD value when parsing the CCSD(T) value.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for all the code reviews! In this case, I have ordered the if clauses in such a way, that a higher priority one will overwrite the previous one. I will need to change a lot of code anyway when I get to implementing geometry optimizations. With the kind of "atomized" PRs, I am leaving that for later. I hope that this is an acceptable approach

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