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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Remove a type restriction in Base.QuadGK.Segment (#19626) #19627

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 23, 2016
Merged

Remove a type restriction in Base.QuadGK.Segment (#19626) #19627

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
6048e50
Remove a type restriction in Base.QuadGK.Segment (#19626)
ajkeller34 Dec 16, 2016
95290a3
Test compatibility of quadgk with unitful numbers / physical quantities.
ajkeller34 Dec 16, 2016
2b25c52
Pare down tests.
ajkeller34 Dec 17, 2016
c2a16b4
More test refinements.
ajkeller34 Dec 17, 2016
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion base/quadgk.jl
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ immutable Segment
a::Number
b::Number
I
E::Real
E
end
isless(i::Segment, j::Segment) = isless(i.E, j.E)

Expand Down
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions test/math.jl
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -760,6 +760,35 @@ end
@test quadgk(cos, 0,0.7,1, norm=abs)[1] ≈ sin(1)
end

module Test19626
using Base.Test

# Define a mock physical quantity type
immutable MockQuantity{T} <: Number
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems like it should work now even if it is not a subtype of Number?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If it is not a subtype of Number then I get a failure in vecnorm.

val::T
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the <: Number necessary? I wouldn't bother parameterizing the type. Just make val::Float64.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

<: Number is necessary, otherwise I get an error from vecnorm.

end

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You shouldn't need to define promotion rules and conversion for a minimal working example. Just define the minimum number of methods necessary for a test.

# Following definitions needed for quadgk to work with MockQuantity
import Base: +, -, *, abs, isnan, isinf, isless
+(a::MockQuantity, b::MockQuantity) = MockQuantity(a.val+b.val)
-(a::MockQuantity, b::MockQuantity) = MockQuantity(a.val-b.val)
*(a::MockQuantity, b::Number) = MockQuantity(a.val*b)
abs(a::MockQuantity) = MockQuantity(abs(a.val))
isnan(a::MockQuantity) = isnan(a.val)
isinf(a::MockQuantity) = isinf(a.val)
isless(a::MockQuantity, b::MockQuantity) = isless(a.val, b.val)

# isless defn. necessary so that default abstol plays nicely with MockQuantity
isless(y::Number, x::MockQuantity) = y == 0 ? isless(MockQuantity(0), x) :
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would just pass abstol = MockQuantity(0.0)

error("Dimensions issue")

# isapprox only needed for test purposes
Base.isapprox(a::MockQuantity, b::MockQuantity) = isapprox(a.val, b.val)

# Test physical quantity-valued functions
@test quadgk(x->MockQuantity(x), 0.0, 1.0)[1] ≈ MockQuantity(0.5)
end

@testset "subnormal flags" begin
# Ensure subnormal flags functions don't segfault
@test any(set_zero_subnormals(true) .== [false,true])
Expand Down