Closes #338

Codecov Report

Merging #425 (b87d1c3) into master (854e835) will decrease coverage by 4.29%. The diff coverage is 5.88%.

:exclamation: Current head b87d1c3 differs from pull request most recent head 56d182b. Consider uploading reports for the commit 56d182b to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #425      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   58.56%   54.26%   -4.30%     
==========================================
  Files          72       80       +8     
  Lines        2756     3282     +526     
==========================================
+ Hits         1614     1781     +167     
- Misses       1142     1501     +359     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	54.26% <5.88%> (-4.30%)	:arrow_down:

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pitop/core/mixins/recreatable.py	45.45% <ø> (ø)
pitop/pma/button.py	42.10% <0.00%> (-11.23%)	:arrow_down:
pitop/pma/buzzer.py	42.10% <0.00%> (-11.23%)	:arrow_down:
pitop/pma/encoder_motor.py	72.22% <ø> (ø)
pitop/pma/led.py	42.10% <0.00%> (-11.23%)	:arrow_down:
pitop/pma/adc_base.py	36.58% <20.00%> (-2.31%)	:arrow_down:
pitop/robotics/simple_pid/PID.py
pitop/robotics/simple_pid/__init__.py
pitop/miniscreen/miniscreen.py	48.33% <0.00%> (ø)
pitop/miniscreen/oled/core/__init__.py	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 9 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update a7614ea...56d182b. Read the comment docs.

This PR address the related issue https://github.com/pi-top/pi-top-Python-SDK/issues/338

When using PMA sensors, checks that the user has entered a valid port - both a sensible value like D0, and also that the port type is valid for the particular sensor being used.

This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging 43c9fcdd2ced7934d0d0f6d51d519e430d4351e7 into 4b4d30de2a6b0305534cd4870a613c99328c00f6 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 2 for Unused import

This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging 69fffe2cc3390fde099a7c4b71788d15712be564 into 4b4d30de2a6b0305534cd4870a613c99328c00f6 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 2 for Unused import

This pull request introduces 2 alerts when merging cdbdeb3da4c24ba810a18db2654357b25270391e into 4b4d30de2a6b0305534cd4870a613c99328c00f6 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 2 for Unused import

This pull request introduces 5 alerts when merging 32e3dc86b898124e77bccb58fce56cd850aea15e into dda2052065b6649774b01820cff5a6670b80de19 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 3 for Missing call to `__init__` during object initialization
• 2 for Unused import

This pull request introduces 3 alerts when merging 5f1cd5bddd81adc4b2d5ce0fe4f44c6a86db22e2 into dda2052065b6649774b01820cff5a6670b80de19 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 3 for Missing call to `__init__` during object initialization

@m-roberts I think this one's ready to be merged. I took into account your comments and used regex instead of dictionaries. Have tested it, and it's passed those automatic checks too. Do I just tag you here to request for it to be merged?

This pull request introduces 3 alerts when merging 56d182b4c6723a211f5ccdb5d57c2a1238d180a2 into a7614eaa1d3b54033dffab8e4cb8674217286318 - view on LGTM.com

new alerts:

• 3 for Missing call to `__init__` during object initialization