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

XAS: Move Startup Logic to _update_structure() #806

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

PNOGillespie
Copy link
Contributor

Addresses requirements for lazy-loading (PR #802) by moving logic for checking core-hole pseudopotentials to _update_structure().

Addresses requirements for lazy-loading (PR aiidalab#802) by moving logic
for checking core-hole pseudopotentials to `_update_structure()`.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 24, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Please upload report for BASE (main@95e8f4b). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #806   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   68.78%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       49           
  Lines           ?     4235           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?     2913           
  Misses          ?     1322           
  Partials        ?        0           
Flag Coverage Δ
python-3.11 68.78% <100.00%> (?)
python-3.9 68.81% <100.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@PNOGillespie
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @edan-bainglass, apologies for the slow speed on this one, but this should be ready to go. Let me know if you need anything else.

One other thing I did notice (which @superstar54 should know about) when running test workflows is that the changes which add the tot_charge feature (#402) are actually interfering with the input parameters for XAS calculations. I think this is simply because the default (if no tot_charge is set by the user) explicitly sets tot_charge = 0 in the overrides, rather than removing the parameter from the overrides entirely, which ultimately changes the inputs for XAS and causes calculations to fail on the QE side of things.

I'll check this myself today, open an issue, and get some sort of fix ready.

@edan-bainglass
Copy link
Member

@PNOGillespie on the contrary, thank you so much for quickly addressing it 🙏 I'll give it a look later today and test on my end. Thanks again 🙂

Copy link
Member

@edan-bainglass edan-bainglass left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay @PNOGillespie, LGTM! Thanks for addressing this.

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