Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

extend lpc to complex inputs, other fixes #517

Merged
merged 25 commits into from
Feb 8, 2024

Conversation

wheeheee
Copy link
Contributor

@wheeheee wheeheee commented Dec 5, 2023

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (3ad3c1c) 97.49% compared to head (1fd5e61) 97.56%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #517      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.49%   97.56%   +0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          18       18              
  Lines        3078     3121      +43     
==========================================
+ Hits         3001     3045      +44     
+ Misses         77       76       -1     

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

src/dspbase.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
- use rev_buf to eliminate allocs as much as possible
- changed multiple assignment so that `@views` macro can be used on outer loop
- taking reference from PR 171
- separate `levinson` and `arburg` from `lpc` and export
- reflection coefficients
- `p::Integer`
- not sure if arburg handles complex arguments, but just in case.
- add test for complex
- error for levinson is weirdly high
- test errors more often than original, cannot figure out why
extra keyword argument for scaling in xcorr, fixes large prediction_error in levinson
1.0 doesn't support `CartesianIndices` with `StepRange`?
- error should be close to std of rand function which is 1
- test `dotu` with different eltypes
Copy link
Member

@martinholters martinholters left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might be a matter of personal taste, but I do prefer explicit returns in long-form functions.

src/dspbase.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lpc.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lpc.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/lpc.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@wheeheee
Copy link
Contributor Author

wheeheee commented Feb 7, 2024

Didn't realize if ... end and && behave differently. Also, if #411 is going to be merged, this would be redundant.

- removed redundant type parameters from drafting
- add ! to mark possibly mutating function
- note to write an autocorr function
@martinholters
Copy link
Member

Also, if #411 is going to be merged, this would be redundant.

Could you expand on that?

@wheeheee
Copy link
Contributor Author

wheeheee commented Feb 8, 2024

_normalize!(x::AbstractArray{<:Integer}, sz::Int) = (x ./ sz)

I was referring to this, which is needed because an array of integers can't be ./=ed.

@martinholters martinholters merged commit b26bc60 into JuliaDSP:master Feb 8, 2024
11 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.

3 participants