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 MethodInstance multiplicity #278

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 15, 2022
Merged

Fix MethodInstance multiplicity #278

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 15, 2022

Conversation

timholy
Copy link
Owner

@timholy timholy commented Feb 15, 2022

Formerly this seemed to return a single MethodInstance, but now it
returns two. The change may be from improvements to MethodAnalysis,
likely timholy/MethodAnalysis.jl#27.
The new behavior is certainly the correct one (there are two distinct
methods, so there had better be two MethodInstances with that
signature---even though one will never get another CodeInstance).

Formerly this seemed to return a single MethodInstance, but now it
returns two. The change is may be from improvements to MethodAnalysis,
likely timholy/MethodAnalysis.jl#27.
The new behavior is certainly the correct one (there are two distinct
methods, so there had better be two MethodInstances with that
signature---even though one will never get another CodeInstance).
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 15, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #278 (53fb824) into master (232f2f7) will decrease coverage by 4.36%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #278      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.95%   82.58%   -4.37%     
==========================================
  Files          16       16              
  Lines        2023     1912     -111     
==========================================
- Hits         1759     1579     -180     
- Misses        264      333      +69     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/invalidation_and_inference.jl 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
src/invalidations.jl 87.04% <0.00%> (-3.12%) ⬇️
src/parcel_snoopi_deep.jl 87.99% <0.00%> (-1.79%) ⬇️
src/deep_demos.jl 57.89% <0.00%> (-1.08%) ⬇️
src/write.jl 91.30% <0.00%> (-1.01%) ⬇️
src/parcel_snoopl.jl 89.47% <0.00%> (-0.53%) ⬇️
SnoopCompileCore/src/snoopi_deep.jl 91.66% <0.00%> (-0.34%) ⬇️
src/parcel_snoopi.jl 93.83% <0.00%> (-0.31%) ⬇️
src/visualizations.jl 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/parcel_snoopc.jl 78.57% <0.00%> (+0.42%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 232f2f7...53fb824. Read the comment docs.

The answer on different Julia versions kept changing,
so it's better to make the test more robust.
@timholy timholy merged commit 66a23ef into master Feb 15, 2022
@timholy timholy deleted the teh/fix_two_mis branch February 15, 2022 23:25
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.

1 participant