Improved benchmark in solarposition.py #1443
Conversation
|
Thanks @roger-lcc! Can you take a look at addressing the Stickler CI comments about code formatting? |
|
Apologize for this! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @roger-lcc this is looking pretty good. At the moment I'm not able to try this out locally, but I will do that later today.
| def time_ephemeris(self, ndays): | ||
| solarposition.ephemeris(self.times, self.lat, self.lon) | ||
| # def time_ephemeris(self, ndays): | ||
| # solarposition.ephemeris(self.times, self.lat, self.lon) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How come these lines are commented out?
|
|
||
| def time_get_solarposition(self, ndays): | ||
| solarposition.get_solarposition(self.times_localized, | ||
| self.lat, self.lon) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure there's any need to benchmark get_solarposition -- since it's just a convenience wrapper around the various solar position algorithms, this is more or less a duplicate of the time_spa_python benchmark.
|
Is there something changed in |
|
Ah, sorry for the confusion. It's okay to ignore the |
|
Thanks for your explanation! Now I have a clear understanding of the situation. Thanks again! |
|
Why was this not merged and being delayed to further versions are there any issues? |
I think I recall wanting to make some changes to the classification of "slow" versus "fast", but it's been long enough that I forget the details. I need to take another look. The intent is to merge this PR eventually, it just hasn't been a priority. |
docs/sphinx/source/whatsnewfor all changes. Includes link to the GitHub Issue with:issue:`num`or this Pull Request with:pull:`num`. Includes contributor name and/or GitHub username (link with:ghuser:`user`).Improved benchmark in solarposition.py
Add
SolarPositionSlowandSolarPositionFastclass. InSolarPositionSlow, test functions usingndays=[1, 10, 100]andtimes_localized. InSolarPositionFast, test functions usingndays=[1, 365 * 10, 365 * 100]andtimes_daily.