Add test for issue #18974 #19425
Merged
Add test for issue #18974 #19425
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
kshyatt
added
sparse
tkelman
reviewed
Nov 27, 2016
|
|
||
| # Check that `broadcast` methods specialized for unary operations over | ||
| # `SparseMatrixCSC`s determine a reasonable return type. (Issue #18974.) | ||
| @test eltype(sin.(spdiagm(Int64(1):Int64(4)))) == Float64 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the first version of this failed with Int? what explains that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Derp on my part explains that: The first version was isa(eltype(...), Float64), with the failure due to isa. Best!
…ver a sparse matrix) from closed PR JuliaLang#18975 that was missed in PR JuliaLang#19065.
|
Rebased. Planning to merge when CI clears. Best! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#18975 included a test for issue #18974. #19065 superseded #18975 and the test got lost. This pull request provides that test. Thanks to
@tkelmanfor catching this!