stdlib-js
refactor: add protocol support to `stats/base/variancewd`
Resolves #5691
Description
What is the purpose of this pull request?
This pull request:
Refactor and add protocol support
Related Issues
Does this pull request have any related issues?
This pull request:
- resolves #5691
Questions
Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?
No.
Other
Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.
No.
Checklist
Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.
- [x] Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.
@stdlib-js/reviewers
Hello! Thank you for your contribution to stdlib.
We noticed that the contributing guidelines acknowledgment is missing from your pull request. Here's what you need to do:
-
Please read our contributing guidelines.
-
Update your pull request description to include this checked box:
- [x] Read, understood, and followed the [contributing guidelines](https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md)
This acknowledgment confirms that you've read the guidelines, which include:
- The developer's certificate of origin
- Your agreement to license your contributions under the project's terms
We can't review or accept contributions without this acknowledgment.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. We look forward to reviewing your contribution!
Coverage Report
| Package | Statements | Branches | Functions | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| stats/base/variancewd | $\color{red}297/340$ $\color{green}+87.35\%$ |
$\color{red}17/18$ $\color{green}+94.44\%$ |
$\color{red}2/3$ $\color{green}+66.67\%$ |
$\color{red}297/340$ $\color{green}+87.35\%$ |
The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.
@kgryte I'm considering closing this PR and opening a new one due to some misunderstanding. The issue was caused by a problem with my local setup, which is now resolved. Apologies for the confusion.
@kgryte Would you prefer that I open a new PR or continue with this one?
@gkbishnoi07 You should not open another PR. You should focus on cleaning up your existing PRs. Otherwise, you will just be creating unnecessary work.
@gkbishnoi07 You should not open another PR. You should focus on cleaning up your existing PRs. Otherwise, you will just be creating unnecessary work.
@kgryte I'm really sorry for what happened. It was a misunderstanding, and there was also an issue with the local setup. I assure you it won't happen again in the future.
This pull request has been automatically closed because it has been inactive for an extended period after changes were requested. If you still wish to pursue this contribution, feel free to reopen the pull request or submit a new one.
We appreciate your interest in contributing to stdlib!