-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Add comments and tidy _rewrite function. #59
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #59 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 85.18% 85.26% +0.08%
==========================================
Files 19 19
Lines 1343 1344 +1
==========================================
+ Hits 1144 1146 +2
+ Misses 199 198 -1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Could you split the style fixes and code changes ? It is indeed hardly readable and it's one of the reason I move it to a separate package to at least remove any JuMP-specific stuff and try to make it simpler. I agree that it could still be improved with refactoring. |
I started fixing a bug for Julia 1.6, and got thoroughly confused with what this function was doing. Hopefully this is more readable.
It's |
By "not", you mean "now" ? |
Haha. Yes. |
minus, | ||
current_sum, | ||
left_factors, | ||
(esc(inner_factor),), |
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.
The bug for 1.6 is here. If inner_factor
contains a sum(1 for _ = 1:0)
, then this evaluates it and throws an error. I'll think about what extra logic needs to be added to fix it in #60
I started fixing a bug for Julia 1.6, and got thoroughly confused
with what this function was doing. Hopefully this is more readable.