-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 58
Delete lock interface implementation from UmfpackLU #617
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #617 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 84.10% 84.18% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 12 12
Lines 9188 9179 -9
==========================================
- Hits 7728 7727 -1
+ Misses 1460 1452 -8 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
I'm not critical of the patch, but why? IMHO, it's fair to warn people that they are waiting for locks to do sparse operations. |
The motivation wasn't really to remove the warning but rather that it is kind of weird that a struct Regarding the warning, since it isn't really actionable by the user, and safe to ignore, it seems kind of pointless? |
I think it would make sense to document it rather than give a warning. |
Makes sense
It is actionable, you can pass a different workspace.
Nobody expects |
No description provided.