Skip to content

Conversation

@JamesWrigley
Copy link
Contributor

These are already defined by Base in terms of ==.

Fixes these invalidations seen when loading CurveFit.jl (CC @ChrisRackauckas):

 inserting !=(x::Integer, y::ForwardDiff.Dual{Ty}) where Ty @ ForwardDiff ~/.julia/packages/ForwardDiff/9ocoj/src/dual.jl:159 invalidated:                                                                                                     
   backedges: 1: superseding !=(x, y) @ Base operators.jl:321 with MethodInstance for !=(::Int64, ::Any) (1 children)                                                                                                                          
              2: superseding !=(x, y) @ Base operators.jl:321 with MethodInstance for !=(::Int32, ::Any) (49 children)                                                                                                                         
              3: superseding !=(x, y) @ Base operators.jl:321 with MethodInstance for !=(::Int64, ::Any) (97 children) 

 inserting !=(x::ForwardDiff.Dual{Tx}, y::Integer) where Tx @ ForwardDiff ~/.julia/packages/ForwardDiff/9ocoj/src/dual.jl:158 invalidated:                                                                                                     
   backedges: 1: superseding !=(x, y) @ Base operators.jl:321 with MethodInstance for !=(::Any, ::Bool) (24 children)                                                                                                                          
              2: superseding !=(x, y) @ Base operators.jl:321 with MethodInstance for !=(::Any, ::Int64) (38 children)                                                                                                                         
              3: superseding !=(x, y) @ Base operators.jl:321 with MethodInstance for !=(::Any, ::Int64) (202 children)   

Would it be possible to make a new release with this?

These are already defined by Base in terms of `==`.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 28, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.75%. Comparing base (71258ec) to head (b50f9a7).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #793   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.75%   90.75%           
=======================================
  Files          11       11           
  Lines        1071     1071           
=======================================
  Hits          972      972           
  Misses         99       99           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@JamesWrigley
Copy link
Contributor Author

pre failures seem to be because of a JET incompatibility.

Copy link
Member

@devmotion devmotion left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, seems like a good change, cf https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/f726949136712f84e8ecfea7429d23e626683c80/base/operators.jl#L308

Can you update the version number?

@JamesWrigley
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure, done in b50f9a7.

@devmotion devmotion merged commit 7262054 into JuliaDiff:master Jan 28, 2026
39 of 52 checks passed
@JamesWrigley JamesWrigley deleted the dual-neq branch January 29, 2026 07:04
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