Skip to content

Update helpers.py #84

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
Jan 31, 2018
Merged

Conversation

zhangchuangnankai
Copy link
Contributor

May be fail to minimize,the minimize will return res.fun with a array(0.0), and get res.fun will get an Exception

May be fail to minimize,the minimize will return res.fun with a array(0.0), and get res.fun will get an Exception
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jan 30, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #84 into master will increase coverage by 0.11%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #84      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.75%   82.87%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files           4        4              
  Lines         290      292       +2     
  Branches       34       35       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits          240      242       +2     
  Misses         45       45              
  Partials        5        5
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
bayes_opt/helpers.py 90.12% <100%> (+0.25%) ⬆️

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 bd5d4fe...0a2bf85. Read the comment docs.

@@ -59,6 +59,10 @@ def acq_max(ac, gp, y_max, bounds, random_state, n_warmup=100000, n_iter=250):
bounds=bounds,
method="L-BFGS-B")

# See if success
if res.success==False:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you change to if not res.success:? This is more pythonic.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

OK, I have changed

Thanks to fmfn's advice:
Can you change to if not res.success:? This is more pythonic.
@fmfn fmfn merged commit 317f735 into bayesian-optimization:master Jan 31, 2018
@fmfn
Copy link
Member

fmfn commented Jan 31, 2018

Thanks for the contribution!

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.

3 participants