Skip to content

[TEST] Low coverage on utility_functions.py #830

@genedan

Description

@genedan

Description

I'm working on this. Most likely this will require 2 or 3 PRs since the missing lines cover a variety of different functions (I/O, patsy, model diagnostics).

Image

Is your feature request aligned with the scope of the package?

  • Yes, absolutely!
  • No, but it's still worth discussing.
  • N/A (this request is not a codebase enhancement).

Describe the solution you'd like, or your current workaround.

No response

Do you have any additional supporting notes?

No response

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Effort > Moderate 🐕Mid-sized tasks estimated to take a few days to a few weeks.Impact > Minor 🔷Small, backward compatible change. Treat like a patch release (e.g., 0.5.8 → 0.5.9).

Type

No type
No fields configured for issues without a type.

Projects

Status

In progress

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions