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

Revert "comment out trinary rules" #62

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mcabbott
Copy link
Member

@mcabbott mcabbott commented Jul 5, 2021

This reverts #60, thus un-reverts #54.

Wants to be run with #61 and JuliaDiff/ForwardDiff.jl#530 before merging.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jul 5, 2021

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.03 🎉

Comparison is base (2001650) 97.86% compared to head (6a7aeef) 97.89%.

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              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/rules.jl 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@mcabbott mcabbott marked this pull request as ready for review September 18, 2021 21:15
@mcabbott mcabbott requested a review from devmotion September 19, 2021 19:51
Copy link
Member

@devmotion devmotion left a 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?

@mcabbott
Copy link
Member Author

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.

src/rules.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
test/runtests.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: David Widmann <[email protected]>
test/runtests.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@devmotion devmotion left a 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.

@devmotion
Copy link
Member

@mcabbott I updated the PR and fixed some tests, do you have any comments? Otherwise I think this PR can be merged.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants