Fix for default AutoForwardDiff

[torfjelde]

By default, AutoForwardDiff() results in chunksize being nothing, not 0.

This then breaks our LogDensityProblemsAD.ADgradient constructor.

[torfjelde]

Should be a fairly simple merge

[sunxd3]

LGTM

[torfjelde]

Okay so tests are failing because if a suuuper old bug it seems, but I'm now very confused as to why this was hit now rather than any time before?

[sunxd3]

@yebai @torfjelde @devmotion turns out the issue is caused by TuringLang/Turing.jl#2170, when run sample(DynamicPPL.TestUtils.DEMO_MODELS[1], Prior(), 10) , it hit

DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl

Line 282 in abcf584

return dot_tilde_assume(

then

DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl

Line 292 in abcf584

return dot_tilde_assume(rng, NodeTrait(dot_tilde_assume, context), context, args...)

and no implementation after that.
Stack trace:

MethodError: no method matching dot_tilde_assume(::Random.TaskLocalRNG, ::DynamicPPL.IsLeaf, ::PriorContext{Nothing}, ::SampleFromPrior, ::InverseGamma{Float64}, ::Vector{Float64}, ::Vector{VarName{:s, Setfield.IndexLens{Tuple{Int64}}}}, ::UntypedVarInfo{DynamicPPL.Metadata{Dict{VarName, Int64}, Vector{Distribution}, Vector{VarName}, Vector{Real}, Vector{Set{DynamicPPL.Selector}}}, Float64})

Closest candidates are:
  dot_tilde_assume(!Matched::AbstractPPL.AbstractContext, ::Any...)
   @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:288
  dot_tilde_assume(::Any, !Matched::AbstractPPL.AbstractContext, ::Any...)
   @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:291
  dot_tilde_assume(!Matched::DynamicPPL.IsLeaf, ::Any, ::AbstractPPL.AbstractContext, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any)
   @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:298
  ...

Closest candidates are:
  dot_tilde_assume(::AbstractPPL.AbstractContext, ::Any...)
   @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:288
  dot_tilde_assume(::Any, ::AbstractPPL.AbstractContext, ::Any...)
   @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:291
  dot_tilde_assume(::DynamicPPL.IsLeaf, ::Any, ::AbstractPPL.AbstractContext, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any)
   @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:298
  ...

Stacktrace:
  [1] dot_tilde_assume(::Random.TaskLocalRNG, ::PriorContext{…}, ::SampleFromPrior, ::InverseGamma{…}, ::Vector{…}, ::Vector{…}, ::UntypedVarInfo{…})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:292
  [2] dot_tilde_assume(context::SamplingContext{…}, right::InverseGamma{…}, left::Vector{…}, vn::Vector{…}, vi::UntypedVarInfo{…})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:282
  [3] dot_tilde_assume!!(context::SamplingContext{…}, right::InverseGamma{…}, left::Vector{…}, vn::Vector{…}, vi::UntypedVarInfo{…})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/context_implementations.jl:406
  [4] demo_dot_assume_dot_observe(__model__::Model{…}, __varinfo__::UntypedVarInfo{…}, __context__::SamplingContext{…}, x::Vector{…}, arg#360::Type{…})
    @ DynamicPPL.TestUtils ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/test_utils.jl:340
  [5] _evaluate!!(model::Model{…}, varinfo::UntypedVarInfo{…}, context::SamplingContext{…})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/model.jl:963
  [6] evaluate_threadunsafe!!(model::Model{…}, varinfo::UntypedVarInfo{…}, context::SamplingContext{…})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/model.jl:936
  [7] evaluate!!(model::Model{…}, varinfo::UntypedVarInfo{…}, context::SamplingContext{…})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/model.jl:889
  [8] step(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, sampler::Sampler{…}, state::Nothing; kwargs::@Kwargs{})
    @ Turing.Inference ~/.julia/dev/Turing/src/mcmc/Inference.jl:137
  [9] step(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, sampler::Sampler{…}, state::Nothing)
    @ Turing.Inference ~/.julia/dev/Turing/src/mcmc/Inference.jl:130
 [10] macro expansion
    @ ~/.julia/packages/AbstractMCMC/YrmkI/src/sample.jl:130 [inlined]
 [11] macro expansion
    @ ~/.julia/packages/ProgressLogging/6KXlp/src/ProgressLogging.jl:328 [inlined]
 [12] macro expansion
    @ ~/.julia/packages/AbstractMCMC/YrmkI/src/logging.jl:9 [inlined]
 [13] mcmcsample(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, sampler::Sampler{…}, N::Int64; progress::Bool, progressname::String, callback::Nothing, discard_initial::Int64, thinning::Int64, chain_type::Type, initial_state::Nothing, kwargs::@Kwargs{})
    @ AbstractMCMC ~/.julia/packages/AbstractMCMC/YrmkI/src/sample.jl:120
 [14] sample(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, sampler::Sampler{…}, N::Int64; chain_type::Type, resume_from::Nothing, initial_state::Nothing, kwargs::@Kwargs{})
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/sampler.jl:93
 [15] sample(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, sampler::Sampler{…}, N::Int64)
    @ DynamicPPL ~/DynamicPPL.jl/src/sampler.jl:83
 [16] sample(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, alg::Prior, N::Int64; kwargs::@Kwargs{})
    @ Turing.Inference ~/.julia/dev/Turing/src/mcmc/Inference.jl:219
 [17] sample(rng::Random.TaskLocalRNG, model::Model{…}, alg::Prior, N::Int64)
    @ Turing.Inference ~/.julia/dev/Turing/src/mcmc/Inference.jl:212
 [18] sample(model::Model{…}, alg::Prior, N::Int64; kwargs::@Kwargs{})
    @ Turing.Inference ~/.julia/dev/Turing/src/mcmc/Inference.jl:209
 [19] sample(model::Model{…}, alg::Prior, N::Int64)
    @ Turing.Inference ~/.julia/dev/Turing/src/mcmc/Inference.jl:203
 [20] entry-point

I am not familiar with the context implementations to instantly see a solution, but maybe you can.

[sunxd3]

The reason it didn't surface is: the CI tests of #571 was run ahead of the merging of TuringLang/Turing.jl#2170.
And it seems there is no DynamicPPL/Turing integration tests for Turing's PR

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.47%. Comparing base (c33eeae) to head (2a4f83d).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #581      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.32%   84.47%   +0.14%     
==========================================
  Files          26       28       +2     
  Lines        3183     3207      +24     
==========================================
+ Hits         2684     2709      +25     
+ Misses        499      498       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.