Skip to content

Conversation

@MilesCranmer
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@MilesCranmer MilesCranmer linked an issue Apr 27, 2023 that may be closed by this pull request
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Apr 27, 2023

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 4916235722

  • 101 of 102 (99.02%) changed or added relevant lines in 4 files are covered.
  • 8 unchanged lines in 5 files lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.6%) to 88.44%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
src/base.jl 81 82 98.78%
Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
src/EvaluateEquation.jl 1 99.64%
src/Utils.jl 1 71.11%
src/InterfaceSymbolicUtils.jl 2 66.67%
src/precompile.jl 2 80.8%
src/SimplifyEquation.jl 2 86.42%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 4903484182: -0.6%
Covered Lines: 964
Relevant Lines: 1090

💛 - Coveralls

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Apr 27, 2023

Benchmark Results

master 5073e35... t[master]/t[5073e35...]
eval/ComplexF32/evaluation 11.5 ± 0.8 ms 11.4 ± 0.69 ms 1.01
eval/ComplexF64/evaluation 14.6 ± 1.1 ms 14.1 ± 1 ms 1.04
eval/Float32/derivative 19.2 ± 1 ms 19.4 ± 0.97 ms 0.986
eval/Float32/derivative_turbo 21.1 ± 1.3 ms 21 ± 1.2 ms 1
eval/Float32/evaluation 3.81 ± 0.3 ms 3.92 ± 0.31 ms 0.971
eval/Float32/evaluation_turbo 0.908 ± 0.082 ms 0.904 ± 0.084 ms 1
eval/Float64/derivative 27.5 ± 4.5 ms 26.9 ± 3.8 ms 1.02
eval/Float64/derivative_turbo 30.6 ± 4.6 ms 29.7 ± 3.8 ms 1.03
eval/Float64/evaluation 4.79 ± 0.36 ms 4.77 ± 0.39 ms 1
eval/Float64/evaluation_turbo 1.42 ± 0.12 ms 1.45 ± 0.12 ms 0.978
time_to_load 15.2 ± 0.12 s 15.1 ± 0.055 s 1.01
utils/combine_operators/break_sharing 0.0738 ± 0.0055 ms 0.0729 ± 0.0072 ms 1.01
utils/convert/break_sharing 0.0575 ± 0.0077 ms 0.0581 ± 0.0083 ms 0.99
utils/convert/preserve_sharing 0.278 ± 0.013 ms 0.282 ± 0.014 ms 0.985
utils/copy/break_sharing 0.0547 ± 0.0057 ms 0.055 ± 0.0086 ms 0.995
utils/copy/preserve_sharing 0.276 ± 0.009 ms 0.277 ± 0.016 ms 0.996
utils/count_constants/break_sharing 0.0324 ± 0.0015 ms 0.0327 ± 0.0015 ms 0.991
utils/count_depth/break_sharing 0.033 ± 0.0012 ms 0.0329 ± 0.0032 ms 1
utils/count_nodes/break_sharing 30.1 ± 2.5 μs 30.9 ± 1.4 μs 0.974
utils/get_set_constants!/break_sharing 0.125 ± 0.0031 ms 0.124 ± 0.0051 ms 1.01
utils/has_constants/break_sharing 10.2 ± 0.9 μs 9.6 ± 0.93 μs 1.06
utils/has_operators/break_sharing 2.76 ± 0.12 μs 2.82 ± 0.18 μs 0.976
utils/index_constants/break_sharing 0.0964 ± 0.0078 ms 0.0981 ± 0.0063 ms 0.983
utils/is_constant/break_sharing 10.1 ± 1.1 μs 11.1 ± 1.1 μs 0.908
utils/simplify_tree/break_sharing 0.195 ± 0.021 ms 0.197 ± 0.024 ms 0.992

Benchmark Plots

A plot of the benchmark results have been uploaded as an artifact to the workflow run for this PR.
Go to "Actions"->"Benchmark a pull request"->[the most recent run]->"Artifacts" (at the bottom).

@MilesCranmer MilesCranmer merged commit 96d6609 into master May 8, 2023
@MilesCranmer MilesCranmer deleted the tree-map branch May 8, 2023 14:25
@MilesCranmer MilesCranmer mentioned this pull request May 8, 2023
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.

tree_map?

3 participants