[WIP] VarName rework #150
Draft
[WIP] VarName rework #150
+1,937
−1,362
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
Contributor
|
AbstractPPL.jl documentation for PR #150 is available at: |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #150 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 86.40% 69.96% -16.45%
===========================================
Files 9 10 +1
Lines 456 546 +90
===========================================
- Hits 394 382 -12
- Misses 62 164 +102 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
penelopeysm
force-pushed
the
py/newvarname
branch
from
f633690 to
f31e37d
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Closes #49
Closes #136
Closes #148
See the HISTORY.md for details.
I'm aware that this is practically impossible to review, but if you are seeing this, you can take heart from the fact that pretty much all the tests for high-level functions like
prefix,unprefix,varname_leaves,hasvalue,getvalue, have not been touched, and continue to pass.Essentially, once you have constructed a
@varname(...)it will pretty much behave the same way it used to.Of course, this is no longer true if you are digging into
getoptic(vn)and things like that. The data structure changes are all insidesrc/varname/optic.jlandsrc/varname/varname.jl. However, it's probably more productive to look at the corresponding tests instead to see what the behaviour is like.It looks complicated, but that's because I have made it very general: more general than old VarName used to be (
begin/endno longer need to be concretised so early), and also more general thanAccessors.IndexLensis (it accepts keyword arguments). The reason for this is because, if we are undertaking a big refactoring, we may as well do it correctly. Otherwise in the future if we want Turing to work with other array types (looking atDimArrayin particular) we will have to come back and fix it again.TODO