Github user MLnick commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12896#discussion_r62071023
--- Diff: python/pyspark/ml/tests.py ---
@@ -1027,6 +1027,21 @@ def test_storage_levels(self):
self.assertEqual(als.getFinalStorageLevel(), "DISK_ONLY")
self.assertEqual(als._java_obj.getFinalStorageLevel(), "DISK_ONLY")
+ def test_unknown_strategy(self):
--- End diff --
The params on the Java side are only set when fit is called afaik.
But yeah the tests are not strictly necessary. I could add a doc string
test for it. My only concern (as with the storage params) is I didn't want
to highlight what is a bit more of an expertparam
On Wed, 4 May 2016 at 18:05, Seth Hendrickson <[email protected]>
wrote:
> In python/pyspark/ml/tests.py
> <https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12896#discussion_r62066768>:
>
> > @@ -1027,6 +1027,21 @@ def test_storage_levels(self):
> > self.assertEqual(als.getFinalStorageLevel(), "DISK_ONLY")
> > self.assertEqual(als._java_obj.getFinalStorageLevel(),
"DISK_ONLY")
> >
> > + def test_unknown_strategy(self):
>
> I see a similar test was added for the storage level params, but I don't
> exactly understand why we need these. We don't implement these types of
> tests for other classes and params and this is just checking the getters
> and setters. Also, the fit call seems unnecessary.
>
> â
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
>
<https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/12896/files/fc437451a598221f0878b7a2e0b87d17572019cc#r62066768>
>
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
