Skip to content

Conversation

@olliesilvester
Copy link
Contributor

@olliesilvester olliesilvester commented Sep 3, 2025

Part of #1200
Prerequisites for CI to pass: DiamondLightSource/dodal#1721

Instructions to reviewer on how to test:

  1. Do thing x
  2. Confirm thing y happens

Checks for reviewer

  • Would the PR title make sense to a user on a set of release notes

@rtuck99 rtuck99 self-assigned this Oct 22, 2025
default=DetectorParamConstants.BEAM_XY_LUT_PATH
)
insertion_prefix: str = "SR03S" if TEST_MODE else "SR03I"
insertion_prefix: str = (
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This leads to a lot of ugliness. We shouldn't be initialising the beamline name in here on module load. The logic setting this also seems highly suspect.

What do we even use insertion_prefix for? I can't find anything in the code. Can we get rid of it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, yeah, it looks like we don't actually use insertion_prefix anywhere, even though all the hyperion test parameters have them as an input. I'll try removing them

"scan_points": [params.scan_points],
"rotation_scan_params": params.model_dump_json(),
}
)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this should be moved out to its own function as we've got too many levels of nesting here

Copy link
Contributor Author

@olliesilvester olliesilvester Dec 8, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we discuss this maybe? I agree that the nesting is hard to read, but it tends to happen a lot just because of Bluesky's heavy use of decorators. I think the nesting may still be nicer than having multiple separate functions which are all basically called rotation_scan. Open to suggestions though

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
import asyncio
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this supposed to be replacing test_do_darks.py in i24.jungrfrau_commissioning or is this another merge snafu?

@DominicOram DominicOram added the jungfrau Changes relating to the jungfrau detector label Oct 30, 2025
@DominicOram
Copy link
Contributor

@olliesilvester will integrate @ndevenish's path provider for now with an aim to get this merged ASAP

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 18, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 99.28571% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 92.47%. Comparing base (327c161) to head (bdf5756).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1234      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   92.29%   92.47%   +0.18%     
==========================================
  Files         142      148       +6     
  Lines        8094     8280     +186     
==========================================
+ Hits         7470     7657     +187     
+ Misses        624      623       -1     
Components Coverage Δ
i24 SSX 78.56% <100.00%> (ø)
hyperion 97.84% <100.00%> (-0.10%) ⬇️
other 98.25% <99.24%> (+0.17%) ⬆️
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

jungfrau Changes relating to the jungfrau detector

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants