-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.8k
[MRG+1] correct comparison in GaussianNB for 'priors' #10005
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've not yet double-checked that this test fails on master (does it?), but this otherwise lgtm
sklearn/tests/test_naive_bayes.py
Outdated
priors = np.array([0.08, 0.14, 0.03, 0.16, 0.11, 0.16, 0.07, 0.14, 0.11, 0.0]) | ||
Y = np.array([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]) | ||
clf = GaussianNB(priors) | ||
clf.fit(X, Y) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Comment "smoke test for issue #9633"
sklearn/tests/test_naive_bayes.py
Outdated
@@ -114,6 +114,16 @@ def test_gnb_priors(): | |||
assert_array_almost_equal(clf.class_prior_, np.array([0.3, 0.7])) | |||
|
|||
|
|||
def test_gnb_priors_sum_isclose(): | |||
"""Test whether the class prior sum is properly tested""" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Use a comment rather than a docstring here. We do this because nose hides the function name when docstring is used.
I have addressed the comments and fixed the failing flake8 errors. Do I need to squash the commits? (I have 2 commits now) Was wondering if you follow some strict policy against 'squashing' public commits. |
what is the benefit of squashing commits at this stage? we squash when we
merge, and until then it's good to have a record of what's changed since
the last review, and to be able to follow links to commits.
…On 26 Oct 2017 4:22 pm, "Gaurav Dhingra" ***@***.***> wrote:
I have addressed the comments and fixed the failing flake8 errors. Do I
need to squash the commits? (I have 2 commits now) Was wondering if you
follow some strict policy against 'squashing' public commits.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#10005 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEz6zvxy9ZPyCvLYVqvOOo7MIOC0XqUks5swBcXgaJpZM4QGh4g>
.
|
That is good to know, since I too was wondering as to why I don't see no
'merge commits' in git history, your comment explains it.
|
Test does fail on master. Squashed and merged, thanks @gxyd ! |
Thanks @TomDLT . This was my first contribution to scikit-learn. |
Congrats on your first contribution, hoping to see you around again ! |
I'll be here. |
Forgot a changelog entry. @gxyd do you mind submitting a new PR with a change to doc/whats_new? |
…cs/donigian-update-contribution-guidelines * 'master' of github.com:scikit-learn/scikit-learn: (23 commits) fixes scikit-learn#10031: fix attribute name and shape in documentation (scikit-learn#10033) [MRG+1] add changelog entry for fixed and merged PR scikit-learn#10005 issue scikit-learn#9633 (scikit-learn#10025) [MRG] Fix LogisticRegression see also should include LogisticRegressionCV(scikit-learn#9995) (scikit-learn#10022) [MRG + 1] Labels of clustering should start at 0 or -1 if noise (scikit-learn#10015) MAINT Remove redundancy in scikit-learn#9552 (scikit-learn#9573) [MRG+1] correct comparison in GaussianNB for 'priors' (scikit-learn#10005) [MRG + 1] ENH add check_inverse in FunctionTransformer (scikit-learn#9399) [MRG] FIX bug in nested set_params usage (scikit-learn#9999) [MRG+1] Fix LOF and Isolation benchmarks (scikit-learn#9798) [MRG + 1] Fix negative inputs checking in mean_squared_log_error (scikit-learn#9968) DOC Fix typo (scikit-learn#9996) DOC Fix typo: x axis -> y axis (scikit-learn#9985) improve example plot_forest_iris.py (scikit-learn#9989) [MRG+1] Deprecate pooling_func unused parameter in AgglomerativeClustering (scikit-learn#9875) DOC update news DOC Fix three typos in manifold documentation (scikit-learn#9990) DOC add missing dot in docstring DOC Add what's new for 0.19.1 (scikit-learn#9983) Improve readability of outlier detection example. (scikit-learn#9973) DOC: Fixed typo (scikit-learn#9977) ...
…issue scikit-learn#9633 (scikit-learn#10025) * add changelog entry for fixed and merged PR scikit-learn#10005 issue scikit-learn#9633 * change name * change PR number
…issue scikit-learn#9633 (scikit-learn#10025) * add changelog entry for fixed and merged PR scikit-learn#10005 issue scikit-learn#9633 * change name * change PR number
Reference Issues/PRs
Fixes #9633
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
correct comparison in GaussianNB for 'priors'
Any other comments?
I am not fully sure if I have written the test as correctly since, I have written it as
clf.fit(X, Y)
and I don't know if I should useassert_....
or not. That is why I have not putMRG
on title of PR.