-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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
Revert "comment out trinary rules" #62
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #62 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.86% 97.89% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 3 3
Lines 187 190 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 183 186 +3
Misses 4 4
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't follow the original ForwardDiff issues and registry problems closely - is this guaranteed to not break any existing releases of ForwardDiff?
Thanks for looking. I thought so but indeed we should re-check. ForwardDiff v0.10.18 and below have the error if there is a trinary rule. This is the line upper-bounding their DiffRules in the registry: https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/blob/master/F/ForwardDiff/Compat.toml#L50-L51 The current version is ForwardDiff v0.10.19 which accepts only DiffRules 1.2.1 and up: https://github.com/JuliaDiff/ForwardDiff.jl/blob/v0.10.19/Project.toml This is reflected here in the registry: https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/blob/master/F/ForwardDiff/Compat.toml#L22-L23 lines added by the robot JuliaRegistries/General#41858 . So future releases should also work smoothly I believe, not touch old bounds. So I think that implies this is safe. |
Co-authored-by: David Widmann <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me.
@mcabbott I updated the PR and fixed some tests, do you have any comments? Otherwise I think this PR can be merged. |
This reverts #60, thus un-reverts #54.
Wants to be run with #61 and JuliaDiff/ForwardDiff.jl#530 before merging.