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

LT-21911: Fix problem that suppressed homographs #259

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 18, 2024
Merged

Conversation

jtmaxwell3
Copy link
Collaborator

@jtmaxwell3 jtmaxwell3 commented Oct 17, 2024

Beth reported that the novel root guesser couldn't handle homographs (e.g. two lexical entries that looked like [Seg]*). This was because there was code to suppress duplicate paths through a pattern, but the scope was too big. Narrowing the scope fixed the problem.


This change is Reviewable

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 69.95%. Comparing base (a8a20ba) to head (0e38274).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #259   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   69.95%   69.95%           
=======================================
  Files         379      379           
  Lines       31767    31767           
  Branches     4454     4454           
=======================================
  Hits        22223    22223           
  Misses       8510     8510           
  Partials     1034     1034           

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

Copy link
Contributor

@ddaspit ddaspit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this need a unit test?

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @jtmaxwell3)

@jtmaxwell3
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I don't think that it needs a unit test. It was just a bug in how I wrote the code, and I don't think that anybody else would make the same mistake. But I can add a unit test if you want.

Copy link
Contributor

@ddaspit ddaspit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's okay.

Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @jtmaxwell3)

@ddaspit ddaspit merged commit 73a8d85 into master Oct 18, 2024
4 checks passed
@ddaspit ddaspit deleted the LT-21911b branch October 18, 2024 18:30
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.

3 participants