Skip to content

make RobustMultiNewton always respect autodiff choice #347

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Merged

Conversation

oscardssmith
Copy link
Member

This probably needs a test, but the TLDR is that it fixes use of RobustMultiNewton with autodiff incompatible functions. Before TrustRegion(; concrete_jac, linsolve, precs) would mean that it would throw duals at the problem even if you specified autodiff=AutoFiniteDiff()

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 5, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (d47b131) 88.06% compared to head (8614ebe) 83.79%.

Files Patch % Lines
src/default.jl 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #347      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.06%   83.79%   -4.27%     
==========================================
  Files          28       28              
  Lines        2178     2179       +1     
==========================================
- Hits         1918     1826      -92     
- Misses        260      353      +93     

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

@avik-pal
Copy link
Member

avik-pal commented Jan 5, 2024

@oscardssmith can you rerun the formatter once?

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

And add a test

@oscardssmith
Copy link
Member Author

Formatted and tests added.

@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 138de9b into SciML:master Jan 6, 2024
@oscardssmith oscardssmith deleted the os/robustmultinewton-autodiff branch January 6, 2024 00:29
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants