JuliaDiff / JuliaDiff/ChainRulesTestUtils.jl
`test_frule` confused about Tuples, and `Fix1`
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
bug
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 50
- Forks
- 18
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
This seems to confuse the tester, it should not expect a tuple length 10 (the input) but shorter.
@test_skip test_frule(filter, >(0.5) ⊢ NoTangent(), xt10; check_inferred=false)
check_result.jl:104
Expression: ActualPrimal === ExpectedPrimal
Evaluated: NTuple{10, Float64} === NTuple{6, Float64}
Also notice that >(0.5) is not handled, hence the ⊢ NoTangent() work-around.
MethodError: no method matching zero(::Base.Fix2{typeof(>), Float64})
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 at check_result.jl:104 and reproduce the test_frule call shown in the issue, including the tuple-length mismatch and the MethodError for Base.Fix2 from >(0.5). Trace how the expected primal and function tangents are derived; done means the test handles the filtered tuple and the predicate without requiring the NoTangent() workaround.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- testing
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100