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

improve apply_type_tfunc accuracy in rare case #49069

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 21, 2023
Merged

Conversation

vtjnash
Copy link
Sponsor Member

@vtjnash vtjnash commented Mar 20, 2023

In the unlikely event this call fails, we can either confidently conclude the result will always fail and stop inference immediately there. Or we can at least conclude that the base type is confidently known, which can potentially improve ml-matches performance later by excluding Union{} or other subtypes.

In the unlikely event this call fails, we can either confidently
conclude the result will always fail and stop inference immediately
there. Or we can at least conclude that the base type is confidently
known, which can potentially improve ml-matches performance later by
excluding Union{} or other subtypes.
@vtjnash vtjnash requested a review from aviatesk March 20, 2023 20:25
@vtjnash vtjnash merged commit 2f687a2 into master Mar 21, 2023
6 checks passed
@vtjnash vtjnash deleted the jn/apply_type_fail branch March 21, 2023 16:08
Xnartharax pushed a commit to Xnartharax/julia that referenced this pull request Apr 19, 2023
In the unlikely event this call fails, we can either confidently
conclude the result will always fail and stop inference immediately
there. Or we can at least conclude that the base type is confidently
known, which can potentially improve ml-matches performance later by
excluding Union{} or other subtypes.
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.

None yet

2 participants