⚠ This page is served via a proxy. Original site: https://github.com
This service does not collect credentials or authentication data.
Skip to content

Conversation

@hugovk
Copy link
Contributor

@hugovk hugovk commented Jan 17, 2026

Also:

  • Fix compatibility with NumPy 2.0 which removed in1d
  • Remove Python 3.9 dependency
  • Run pyupgrade for 3.10+
  • Update pre-commit and fix B018 "Found useless Tuple expression"
  • Update GitHub Actions
  • Set min version as 3.10 in docs and fix typos

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 17, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.21%. Comparing base (042a0cf) to head (e37a862).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2455      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.22%   91.21%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          20       20              
  Lines       11847    11845       -2     
  Branches     2300     2300              
==========================================
- Hits        10807    10805       -2     
  Misses        569      569              
  Partials      471      471              
Flag Coverage Δ
C 91.21% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
python 98.63% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.

@hyanwong
Copy link
Member

Great spots on the typos etc and the in1d which is causing the site builds to fail. I'll let @benjeffery check on the 3.10 stuff, but it all LGTM.

Copy link
Member

@jeromekelleher jeromekelleher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

All LGTM - thanks @hugovk (and nice to see you again!)

Fix typo in review
@hugovk
Copy link
Contributor Author

hugovk commented Jan 19, 2026

Hello! btw saw some nice praise in https://arxiv.org/pdf/2601.09634:

It is hard to overstate the importance of msprime in the current landscape of CWR simulators. Before its publication, it was largely accepted that large-scale simulations were only possible through approximations. msprime proved that a careful implementation of Hudson’s algorithm could, for all intents and purposes, outperform sequential approximations even on genome-scale datasets.

@benjeffery
Copy link
Member

I'm picking this up and will get it merged.

Copy link
Member

@benjeffery benjeffery left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great work, I think you found all the spots to update!

@jeromekelleher jeromekelleher added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 19, 2026
@benjeffery
Copy link
Member

I have updated the rules at https://github.com/tskit-dev/msprime/settings/branch_protection_rules/17687413 so this should merge now.

Merged via the queue into tskit-dev:main with commit e12e722 Jan 19, 2026
13 checks passed
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.

4 participants