Skip to content

Conversation

@victorlin
Copy link
Member

@victorlin victorlin commented Mar 10, 2025

Description of proposed changes

This has more flexibility than ambiguous dates in reduced precision which are limited to the range of a single calendar year or month.

Related issue(s)

Checklist

@victorlin victorlin self-assigned this Mar 10, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 10, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 77.77778% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 73.64%. Comparing base (49197e0) to head (18422e7).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
augur/dates/__init__.py 77.77% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1770   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   73.63%   73.64%           
=======================================
  Files          81       81           
  Lines        8641     8650    +9     
  Branches     1765     1767    +2     
=======================================
+ Hits         6363     6370    +7     
- Misses       1976     1977    +1     
- Partials      302      303    +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@victorlin victorlin force-pushed the victorlin/support-iso-time-intervals branch 2 times, most recently from 9aa117f to c8b8005 Compare March 11, 2025 22:59
Copy link
Contributor

@joverlee521 joverlee521 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes LGTM. My only suggestion is to clearly document the supported formats for date intervals since that will dictate the outputs for augur curate format-dates in #1494

@victorlin
Copy link
Member Author

Note: this format is unsupported during subsampling for the same reason as #844: subsampling doesn't use get_numerical_date_from_value, but instead has its own date parsing logic where only YYYY-MM-DD is supported. I'll look into swapping that with get_numerical_date_from_value.

@victorlin victorlin marked this pull request as draft March 18, 2025 23:11
@victorlin
Copy link
Member Author

#1774 should be resolved before this is merged, so that the new format is supported by subsampling in augur filter.

@victorlin victorlin force-pushed the victorlin/support-iso-time-intervals branch from ed382a0 to a27e55d Compare March 25, 2025 23:35
@victorlin victorlin changed the base branch from master to victorlin/date-parsing-improvements March 25, 2025 23:35
@victorlin victorlin changed the title Support ISO time intervals Support precise date ranges Mar 25, 2025
@victorlin victorlin force-pushed the victorlin/support-iso-time-intervals branch from a27e55d to ca464ab Compare March 25, 2025 23:39
@victorlin victorlin marked this pull request as ready for review March 31, 2025 17:46
@victorlin victorlin force-pushed the victorlin/date-parsing-improvements branch from c0d3f3e to 64c13a6 Compare April 10, 2025 22:43
Base automatically changed from victorlin/date-parsing-improvements to master April 10, 2025 22:58
This has more flexibility than ambiguous dates in reduced precision
which are limited to the range of a single calendar year or month.
@victorlin victorlin force-pushed the victorlin/support-iso-time-intervals branch from ca464ab to 18422e7 Compare June 11, 2025 00:26
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.

Allow precise date ranges

5 participants