JuliaCI / JuliaCI/BenchmarkTools.jl
Warn against possible code invalidations
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 684
- Forks
- 107
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Suppose I execute the following code in a fresh REPL (I haven't imported SpecialFunctions):
julia> f(x) = erf(x);
julia> f(1)
ERROR: UndefVarError: erf not defined
Stacktrace:
[1] f(::Int64) at ./REPL[1]:1
[2] top-level scope at REPL[2]:1
julia> using BenchmarkTools, SpecialFunctions
julia> x = 1; @btime f($x);
27.645 ns (1 allocation: 16 bytes)
This allocation is not "real". See upstream issue: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/35889. If I start a new fresh REPL, and this time load SpecialFunctions at the beginning:
julia> using BenchmarkTools, SpecialFunctions
julia> f(x) = erf(x);
julia> x = 1; @btime f($x);
22.195 ns (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
the allocation is gone.
I think we should warn about this in the README or the docs.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the README or documentation in BenchmarkTools.jl and review the invalidation example and linked Julia issue #35889. Add a warning explaining that defining code before loading SpecialFunctions can affect benchmark allocations, and confirm the documented guidance covers both REPL sequences shown.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- documentation, performance
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100