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

Add ignore_missing_comparison=true for JET tests #271

Conversation

simonschoelly
Copy link
Contributor

For testing with JET >= 0.8.4 we need to specify ignore_missing_comparison=true in order for the type inference test with the == operator to correctly work.

See: https://github.com/aviatesk/JET.jl/releases/tag/v0.8.4

@simonschoelly simonschoelly added the bug Something isn't working label Jul 2, 2023
@simonschoelly simonschoelly self-assigned this Jul 2, 2023
@simonschoelly simonschoelly requested a review from gdalle July 2, 2023 16:03
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 2, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #271 (d3cbf62) into master (3c97457) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #271   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.17%   97.17%           
=======================================
  Files         114      114           
  Lines        6656     6656           
=======================================
  Hits         6468     6468           
  Misses        188      188           

Copy link
Member

@gdalle gdalle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, good catch

@gdalle gdalle merged commit c554ed8 into JuliaGraphs:master Jul 2, 2023
12 checks passed
@simonschoelly simonschoelly deleted the add-ignore-mission-comparison-for-jet branch July 2, 2023 18:36
@gdalle gdalle mentioned this pull request Jul 2, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants