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

Create rule S6929: The axis argument should be specified when using TensorFlow's reduction operations #3644

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 4, 2024

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

You can preview this rule here (updated a few minutes after each push).

Review

A dedicated reviewer checked the rule description successfully for:

  • logical errors and incorrect information
  • information gaps and missing content
  • text style and tone
  • PR summary and labels follow the guidelines

@joke1196 joke1196 changed the title Create rule S6929 Create rule S6929: The axis argument should be specified when using TensorFlow's reduction operations Feb 13, 2024

x = tf.constant([[1, 1, 1], [1, 1, 1]])
tf.reduce_sum(x, axis=0) # Compliant: the reduction will happen only on the axis 0, resulting in `[2,2,2]`

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

remove this empty line to keep same lines number as for noncompliant block

== Why is this an issue?

The result of a TensorFlow's reduction operation highly depends on the shape of the Tensor provided.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

not mentioned which functions exactly mentioned. Maybe it make sense to say like:
For example TensorFlow's reduction function tf.reduce_sum...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link

Quality Gate passed Quality Gate passed for 'rspec-frontend'

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

Copy link

Quality Gate passed Quality Gate passed for 'rspec-tools'

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

@ghislainpiot ghislainpiot marked this pull request as ready for review April 4, 2024 15:13
@ghislainpiot ghislainpiot enabled auto-merge (squash) April 4, 2024 15:13
Copy link

sonarqube-next bot commented Apr 4, 2024

Quality Gate passed Quality Gate passed for 'rspec-frontend'

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

@ghislainpiot ghislainpiot merged commit 2b30d4d into master Apr 4, 2024
9 of 12 checks passed
@ghislainpiot ghislainpiot deleted the rule/add-RSPEC-S6929 branch April 4, 2024 15:17
Copy link

sonarqube-next bot commented Apr 4, 2024

Quality Gate passed Quality Gate passed for 'rspec-tools'

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants