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

PatchMerging is not correct for 3D. #8284

Closed
pooya-mohammadi opened this issue Jan 7, 2025 · 1 comment
Closed

PatchMerging is not correct for 3D. #8284

pooya-mohammadi opened this issue Jan 7, 2025 · 1 comment

Comments

@pooya-mohammadi
Copy link
Contributor

x0 = x[:, 0::2, 0::2, 0::2, :]

t = [
    (0, 0, 0),
    (1, 0, 0),
    (0, 1, 0),
    (0, 0, 1),
    (1, 0, 1),
    (0, 1, 0),
    (0, 0, 1),
    (1, 1, 1),
    ]
print(set(t))
# {(1, 0, 1), (0, 1, 0), (0, 0, 0), (1, 0, 0), (0, 0, 1), (1, 1, 1)}

As you can see two of these are the same. To be exact, (x3, x6) and (x2, x5) are the same.

@KumoLiu KumoLiu assigned ericspod and Nic-Ma and unassigned ericspod and Nic-Ma Jan 9, 2025
ericspod pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 10, 2025
Fixes # .

### Description

A few sentences describing the changes proposed in this pull request.

### Types of changes
- [x] Non-breaking change (fix or new feature that would not break
existing functionality).

Fixing issue #8284
In this format there are no duplicates:

```
t = [
    (0, 0, 0),
    (1, 0, 0),
    (0, 1, 0),
    (0, 0, 1),
    (1, 0, 1),
    (1, 1, 0),
    (0, 1, 1),
    (1, 1, 1),
    ]
print(set(t))
# {(1, 0, 1), (1, 1, 0), (0, 1, 0), (0, 0, 0), (1, 0, 0), (0, 0, 1), (1, 1, 1), (0, 1, 1)}
```

---------

Signed-off-by: pooya-mohammadi <[email protected]>
@ericspod
Copy link
Member

This issue has been addressed by #8285 but can be re-opened if not.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants