Simplify promote_type_fallback #334
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
https://github.com/jump-dev/MutableArithmetics.jl/actions/runs/16967361630/job/48094753814?pr=334#step:6:139 seems like a strict improvement - fewer allocations. However, the failing JuMP test is not good. It might be a missing rule, but that means this PR would break JuMP. |
blegat
force-pushed
the
bl/simplify_promote_type_fallback
branch
from
af514a6 to
0267f18
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Suggested by @AayushSabharwal. I am wondering whether that wouldn't be better compared to what we have.
The types for which that does not work are the types from JuMP, MOI and MultivariatePolynomials for which we already have custom methods (because the fallback would be allocating).
This also won't work for
Matrix * Vectorbut the fallback withonealso don't work there.It also fixes the following but that @AayushSabharwal just reported to me:
It would also reduce the number of weird errors reported by users of JuMP saying
zero(::...)is not defined.