Add nanmath option #941
Add nanmath option #941
Conversation
Codecov Report
❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #941 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 77.47% 8.35% -69.12%
==========================================
Files 26 26
Lines 3329 3267 -62
==========================================
- Hits 2579 273 -2306
- Misses 750 2994 +2244
... and 24 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
|
@shashi do you know what happened to |
src/build_function.jl
Outdated
| @@ -108,7 +108,11 @@ function _build_function(target::JuliaTarget, op, args...; | |||
| states = LazyState(), | |||
| linenumbers = true, | |||
| wrap_code = nothing, | |||
| cse = false, kwargs...) | |||
| cse = false, | |||
| nanmath = false, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is there a reason to not default to true?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because defaulting to NaNMath would break our implicit support for complex numbers. See JuliaMath/NaNMath.jl#66
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we just check if eltype(...) <: AbstractComplex ... in the replaced function? I think it would be pretty important to have this as the default.
ChrisRackauckas
force-pushed
the
myb/nanmath
branch
from
66a4f13
to
cf50235
Compare
No description provided.