Skip to content

fixed for Julia v0.7 #329

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
Jul 19, 2018
Merged

fixed for Julia v0.7 #329

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 19, 2018

Conversation

fredrikekre
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@fredrikekre fredrikekre force-pushed the fe/0.7 branch 2 times, most recently from 3f5eb9a to 297fa17 Compare July 4, 2018 10:15
@fredrikekre
Copy link
Contributor Author

Great; all green! Some things to note:

  1. Some package, e.g. StaticArrays that require Statistics are broken on beta, so I disabled testing on beta for now
  2. There is no need to build sysimg to make simd work on 0.7 (🎉) so I removed that on 0.7.

Would be great to get this merged and tagged, to make ForwardDiff pass Keno's new pkgeval!

@KristofferC
Copy link
Collaborator

Perhaps a few more using Compat.LinearAlgebra in the other diff modules to silence some of the deprecation warnings when testing?

@fredrikekre
Copy link
Contributor Author

Those are JuliaDiff/DiffTests.jl#3

@jrevels
Copy link
Member

jrevels commented Jul 5, 2018

There is no need to build sysimg to make simd work on 0.7 (🎉) so I removed that on 0.7.

🎉indeed!

Thanks for this.

.travis.yml Outdated
- julia: nightly
# matrix:
# allow_failures:
# - julia: nightly
notifications:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It might be better to do:

julia:
    - 0.7
    - nightly
matrix:
  allow_failures:
  - julia: nightly

I think the next release of ForwardDiff should be v0.7 only. We can backport future fixes to previous minor releases if needed. Trying to maintain a single codebase to support two separate Julia versions isn't worth it IMO.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

See comments here: JuliaDiff/DiffTests.jl#3 (comment)
Arguably nightly is more important to test at this stage compared to - 0.7 which is 0.7-beta

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If a contributor makes a PR which passes 0.7 but not nightly, I'd merge it regardless, since I don't pass/fail that contributor's work based on unreleased/changing upstream behavior.

Downstream package CI really should not depend on unfixed upstream dependencies. If an upstream tool wants downstream tools to update, upstream can post new tags for the 0.7 target, and downstream can update accordingly.

Note that the allowing failures in the build matrix still runs the tests, so we can still keep our eye on it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Guess we have to wait for rc-1 then.

@jrevels
Copy link
Member

jrevels commented Jul 5, 2018

As mentioned in the other comment, I think we just drop v0.6 support on ForwardDiff master with this PR. Obviously the existing ForwardDiff release can continue to be supported via backports if needed.

@fredrikekre
Copy link
Contributor Author

Okay, I will update the PR and eliminate 0.6 stuff.

- bump Julia requirement to 0.7-beta
- update Travis and AppVeyor scripts
- remove usage of Compat
- misc other Julia 0.7 changes
@fredrikekre
Copy link
Contributor Author

Now passes on nightly and 0.7-beta2.

@fredrikekre
Copy link
Contributor Author

bump

@jrevels jrevels merged commit 2d09793 into JuliaDiff:master Jul 19, 2018
@jrevels
Copy link
Member

jrevels commented Jul 19, 2018

Thanks again!

@fredrikekre fredrikekre deleted the fe/0.7 branch July 19, 2018 12:53
@tkf tkf mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2018
4 tasks
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.

3 participants