`test_frule` confused about Tuples, and `Fix1` #231

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Open

mcabbott opened this issue Jan 17, 2022 · 0 comments

Labels

bug

Member

mcabbott commented Jan 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

This seems to confuse the tester, it should not expect a tuple length 10 (the input) but shorter.

https://github.com/JuliaDiff/ChainRules.jl/pull/570/files#diff-14d216cb53721d9360bbbcc399d93fff67f2594bd388162abbbe82c59ad1ba9fR229

@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})

The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:

oxinabox added the bug label

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment