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

fix: make compiler happy #1611

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 16, 2024
Merged

fix: make compiler happy #1611

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 16, 2024

Conversation

thofma
Copy link
Member

@thofma thofma commented Feb 16, 2024

No description provided.

@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ ring.
"""
function gens(a::MPolyRing{T}) where {T <: RingElement}
n = a.num_vars
return [gen(a, i, Val{a.ord}) for i in 1:n]
return elem_type(a)[gen(a, i, Val{a.ord})::elem_type(a) for i in 1:n]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
return elem_type(a)[gen(a, i, Val{a.ord})::elem_type(a) for i in 1:n]
return elem_type(a)[gen(a, i, Val(a.ord))::elem_type(a) for i in 1:n]

Val objects are supposed to be created with (), the {} is their type

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, but the methods expect their type. It is unstable anyway.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok. I don't really care.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Val{a.ord} and Val(a.ord) do different things and unless the suggestion was to rewrite everyhing, I don't understand the comment.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

please just ignore the comment

@lgoettgens
Copy link
Collaborator

If re-running the in validations job enough times makes it green, this is fine from my pov

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 16, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (952c816) 86.96% compared to head (04a64b4) 86.96%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1611   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   86.96%   86.96%           
=======================================
  Files         114      114           
  Lines       29642    29642           
=======================================
  Hits        25778    25778           
  Misses       3864     3864           

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

@thofma thofma enabled auto-merge (squash) February 16, 2024 13:37
@thofma thofma merged commit 0b5e698 into master Feb 16, 2024
30 of 31 checks passed
@thofma thofma deleted the th/fixinf branch February 16, 2024 13:49
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