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

Fix type stability and allow JacVec to be non-square jacobians #274

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 15, 2023
Merged

Fix type stability and allow JacVec to be non-square jacobians #274

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 15, 2023

Conversation

avik-pal
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 13, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 17 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (9a713c6) 86.62% compared to head (84c0dc3) 84.72%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #274      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.62%   84.72%   -1.91%     
==========================================
  Files          21       22       +1     
  Lines        1286     1283       -3     
==========================================
- Hits         1114     1087      -27     
- Misses        172      196      +24     
Files Coverage Δ
src/SparseDiffTools.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/differentiation/jaches_products.jl 93.78% <100.00%> (-1.75%) ⬇️
src/differentiation/vecjac_products.jl 89.28% <100.00%> (+8.47%) ⬆️
src/differentiation/common.jl 59.52% <59.52%> (ø)

... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@avik-pal
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ChrisRackauckas the failure is because, we did not throw a warning before. The main change here is that if someone passes p and t, the general expectation should be that the function also accepts those as arguments. In the previous implementation, we dropped p and t after taking them as inputs, so I am giving a warning that the input function doesn't accept them as inputs

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

That's fine, we should just make sure we fix downstream before merging so that way it's ready.

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.

2 participants