Skip to content

Use ternary if in resize #3533

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 10, 2021
Merged

Use ternary if in resize #3533

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 10, 2021

Conversation

NicolasHug
Copy link
Member

Not very important, just making sure this works now

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 9, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #3533 (768b103) into master (afc502b) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3533      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.75%   78.75%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         105      105              
  Lines        9750     9748       -2     
  Branches     1566     1565       -1     
==========================================
- Hits         7679     7677       -2     
  Misses       1581     1581              
  Partials      490      490              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
torchvision/transforms/functional_tensor.py 79.84% <100.00%> (-0.08%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update afc502b...768b103. Read the comment docs.

@NicolasHug
Copy link
Member Author

We can use the ternary if now as it's been fixed in pytorch pytorch/pytorch#53195
@fmassa is this worth merging or should I close?

Copy link
Member

@fmassa fmassa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

@fmassa fmassa merged commit c9e0fdd into pytorch:master Mar 10, 2021
@datumbox
Copy link
Contributor

I think it's good to fix things like that as we spot them. Shall we create a PR tag for code quality improvements so that we don't mark it as fix/improvement on the release notes?

@NicolasHug
Copy link
Member Author

Agreed, I had created a new "refactoring" tag but "code quality" is probably better as it's more general - so I renamed the tag

facebook-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 10, 2021
Reviewed By: NicolasHug, cpuhrsch

Differential Revision: D26945739

fbshipit-source-id: f615dde8c293f736f68826676446c04a13897b21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants