JuliaDiff / JuliaDiff/AbstractDifferentiation.jl

Regression in type inferrability

Open
#121 5 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

question
Dominant language
Julia
Stars
138
Forks
18
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

When I bumped AbstractDifferentiation compat to 0.6 on ImplicitDifferentiation, I got type inference errors in ChainRulesTestUtils that were not there before. Probably a regression due to the latest changes. Any idea what might have worsened inference @devmotion ?
https://github.com/gdalle/ImplicitDifferentiation.jl/actions/runs/6659445596/job/18098532825

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with the linked ImplicitDifferentiation.jl Actions run and the AbstractDifferentiation compat 0.6 change, then inspect the reported ChainRulesTestUtils type-inference errors. No source file or test path is named in the issue; done means identifying the regression and restoring the previously working inference behavior.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
julia
Domain
compilers
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Needs clarification
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.