Increase test coverage of rasterization
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 394
- Forks
- 95
- Avg merge
- 4d 3h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 7
Description
As noted here (https://github.com/scverse/spatialdata/pull/155#pullrequestreview-1330038934), the rasterization code has quite a few code branches. I think we need to make sure that we test all of the cases to make sure we don't have accidental regressions in the future. In particular, there are a lot of assertions where we test the passing case, but don't test that they actually raise when necessary (see example below ) . I think this can wait until after initial release, but we should probably address this before too much time has passed and we forget what the code does 😛
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing spatialdata/_core/_rasterize.py around lines 91-143 and the linked pull request review. Identify the untested branches, especially assertions that should raise on invalid cases, then add coverage for each behavior and confirm the rasterization tests pass without regressions.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- testing-qa
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100