Skip to content
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.

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

Use a proper polyalgorithm algorithm type #278

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 6, 2023

Conversation

avik-pal
Copy link
Member

@avik-pal avik-pal commented Nov 6, 2023

Adding this since it makes it easy to write type-stable polyalgorithms. Once this is in we can simply define a custom polyalgorithm algorithm for #277 as well.

@avik-pal
Copy link
Member Author

avik-pal commented Nov 6, 2023

I thing that might break is if someone was writing ::RobustMultiNewton. Do we guarantee that the algorithms are types that can be dispatched on?

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 6, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #278 (c5c0176) into master (adc3b31) will decrease coverage by 44.89%.
The diff coverage is 55.55%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #278       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   93.58%   48.69%   -44.89%     
===========================================
  Files          19       19               
  Lines        1807     1805        -2     
===========================================
- Hits         1691      879      -812     
- Misses        116      926      +810     
Files Coverage Δ
src/NonlinearSolve.jl 97.10% <ø> (-1.45%) ⬇️
src/default.jl 33.75% <55.55%> (-49.80%) ⬇️

... and 16 files with indirect coverage changes

📣 Codecov offers a browser extension for seamless coverage viewing on GitHub. Try it in Chrome or Firefox today!

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

no

@avik-pal
Copy link
Member Author

avik-pal commented Nov 6, 2023

@ChrisRackauckas is the forwarddiff linear solve failure from nonlinear solve or something changed in linear solve?

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

That's a LinearSolve thing, don't worry about it.

@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 5e8149a into SciML:master Nov 6, 2023
6 of 11 checks passed
@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

Can you make the 23 tests more robust?

@avik-pal avik-pal deleted the ap/cleanup branch November 6, 2023 02:32
@avik-pal
Copy link
Member Author

avik-pal commented Nov 6, 2023

Probably disable the GeneralBroyden? It fails only sometimes on CI and locally always passes. I can't even reproduce the failure reliably

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

Or make it simpler, like number of successes > 5

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants