Skip to content
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

Fixed spelling errors in docstrings #989

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

JustinTervala
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes

This PR fixes multiple spelling errors as identified by PyCharm. It addresses Issue 988
#988

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 25, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #989 into dev will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #989      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.77%   94.76%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         116      116              
  Lines       11314    11314              
==========================================
- Hits        10723    10722       -1     
- Misses        591      592       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pgmpy/estimators/BayesianEstimator.py 91.89% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/estimators/HillClimbSearch.py 98.68% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/inference/ExactInference.py 94.81% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/sampling/Sampling.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/readwrite/ProbModelXML.py 85.68% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/factors/continuous/ContinuousFactor.py 86.3% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/models/MarkovChain.py 98.63% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
...mpy/factors/distributions/CanonicalDistribution.py 94.44% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/estimators/StructureScore.py 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
pgmpy/inference/mplp.py 97.18% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
... and 14 more

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 f9be170...be588a1. Read the comment docs.

@@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ def _add_element(potential, var, potential_tag):
For example: {'role': 'Utility',
'Variables': ['D0', 'D1', 'C0', 'C1'],
'type': 'Tree/ADD',
'UtilityVaribale': 'U1'}
'UtilityVariable': 'U1'}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ankurankan Is this done on purpose? Or in code at line 947 mistake has been repeated. I'm not able to understand.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I purposefully did not change that field name to avoid changing the API. If you would like, I can change it there too

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@JustinTervala @khalibartan I think that is a typo and should be fixed.

@ankurankan
Copy link
Member

@JustinTervala Thanks for the PR. It would be great if you could sqaush all your commits in a single commit and rebase your branch on current dev.

Copy link
Member

@ankurankan ankurankan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good except for one more typo fix.

@ankurankan
Copy link
Member

@JustinTervala Couple of tests are failing. Could you please check ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants