Fix pintk bug: random models with jumps fails#1986
Open
dlakaplan wants to merge 1 commit intonanograv:masterfrom
Open
Fix pintk bug: random models with jumps fails#1986dlakaplan wants to merge 1 commit intonanograv:masterfrom
dlakaplan wants to merge 1 commit intonanograv:masterfrom
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@scottransom @abhisrkckl @paulray : I think this one is minor otherwise |
dlakaplan
added
bug fix
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When I was trying to use random models in PINTk with a model that had jumps, it failed in an obscure way involving a table merge. Somehow the TOA tables got an additional "f" column added as part of the conversion from the JUMP model which just reflected the "-f" flag. But then the "f" columns had a type mismatch between the real + random TOAs, and that broke things.
I still don't really understand why the column gets added. But this seems to deal with it in a way that hopefully doesn't break anything else. If somebody understands the origin of this column let me know. It's also possible to just restrict this fix to only the PINTk code, so it would have minimal other interactions.