Skip to content

Fully qualify constructor extension #461

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 6, 2025

Conversation

jpthiele
Copy link
Contributor

@jpthiele jpthiele commented May 6, 2025

Extending constructors without module specification can lead to undefined behaviour in case of name clashes. This is fixed by fully qualifying ArrayInterface.BandedMatrixIndex when it is extended in the banded matrix ext.

Extending constructors without module specification can lead to undefined behaviour in case of name clashes. 
This is fixed by fully qualifying `ArrayInterface.BandedMatrixIndex` when it is extended in the banded matrix ext.
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 6, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 62.71%. Comparing base (9e3936c) to head (9d38d86).
Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #461   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   62.71%   62.71%           
=======================================
  Files          12       12           
  Lines         574      574           
=======================================
  Hits          360      360           
  Misses        214      214           

☔ 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.

@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 05916b6 into JuliaArrays:master May 6, 2025
15 of 18 checks passed
@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

Thanks! It would be good to test this better but it's such an edge case to hit.

@jpthiele
Copy link
Contributor Author

jpthiele commented May 6, 2025

Thanks! It would be good to test this better but it's such an edge case to hit.

Is there a reasonable way to catch and save warnings thrown by a function call without interrupting/stopping it?
If yes I could add something to DownstreamTester since Pkg.add() already throws these warnings in nightly.

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

catch and save warnings thrown by a function call without interrupting/stopping it?

Modify the warn logger or redirect stderr?

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