Skip to content

Conversation

@LasNikas
Copy link
Collaborator

I noticed that it makes more sense to pass the cross sectional area instead of calculating it with the particle size.
Also, it is not correct calculated in main, so this is actually a bug fix.

@LasNikas LasNikas added bug Something isn't working enhancement New feature or request labels Nov 22, 2025
@LasNikas LasNikas requested review from efaulhaber and svchb November 22, 2025 08:21
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 22, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 89.60%. Comparing base (32679eb) to head (e0417cb).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #992      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.60%   89.60%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         120      120              
  Lines        8588     8587       -1     
==========================================
- Hits         7695     7694       -1     
  Misses        893      893              
Flag Coverage Δ
total 89.60% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unit 64.83% <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.

@LasNikas LasNikas self-assigned this Nov 25, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants