Simplify minimum/maximum on sparse vectors #42845
Merged
+3
−9
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Unfortunately, I don't recall the details. |
|
Is there a need to backport this (does it fix something)? Otherwise, it might as well just be on master? |
Well, it "beautifies" something that was added in the v1.7 cycle. Perhaps not necessary. |
LilithHafner
pushed a commit
to LilithHafner/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2022
LilithHafner
pushed a commit
to LilithHafner/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 8, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I couldn't detect an ambiguity, and also this didn't avoid ambiguities. If there was one, it would still exist for callable objects of type different then
FunctionorType.@alyst Do you remember what type of ambiguity you found back then? It could be that by the time #29884 got merged (2.5 years after first commit), the ambiguity was already resolved.