Skip to content

Conversation

@vchuravy
Copy link
Member

@vchuravy vchuravy commented Nov 4, 2025

As long as the finalizer is const this should be the right thing to do for most cases.

@vchuravy vchuravy requested a review from wsmoses November 4, 2025 22:10
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Your PR no longer requires formatting changes. Thank you for your contribution!

@vchuravy
Copy link
Member Author

vchuravy commented Nov 4, 2025

Motivated by #518 (comment)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 23 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 69.92%. Comparing base (3eaa1fb) to head (344d8db).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/internal_rules.jl 0.00% 23 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2736      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   70.01%   69.92%   -0.09%     
==========================================
  Files          58       58              
  Lines       19300    19323      +23     
==========================================
- Hits        13513    13512       -1     
- Misses       5787     5811      +24     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Benchmark Results

main 344d8db... main / 344d8db...
basics/make_zero/namedtuple 0.0559 ± 0.0021 μs 0.0542 ± 0.0027 μs 1.03 ± 0.065
basics/make_zero/struct 0.265 ± 0.0093 μs 0.258 ± 0.0062 μs 1.03 ± 0.044
basics/overhead 5.24 ± 0.92 ns 5.56 ± 0.011 ns 0.942 ± 0.17
basics/remake_zero!/namedtuple 0.234 ± 0.017 μs 0.235 ± 0.012 μs 0.999 ± 0.087
basics/remake_zero!/struct 0.239 ± 0.011 μs 0.237 ± 0.014 μs 1.01 ± 0.077
fold_broadcast/multidim_sum_bcast/1D 10.4 ± 1.8 μs 10.3 ± 0.33 μs 1.01 ± 0.17
fold_broadcast/multidim_sum_bcast/2D 12.2 ± 0.29 μs 12.2 ± 0.28 μs 1 ± 0.033
time_to_load 1.3 ± 0.038 s 1.28 ± 0.021 s 1.01 ± 0.034

Benchmark Plots

A plot of the benchmark results has been uploaded as an artifact at https://github.com/EnzymeAD/Enzyme.jl/actions/runs/19147239268/artifacts/4491418091.

@vchuravy vchuravy force-pushed the vc/finalzer_support branch from e702ea9 to 00cbd6e Compare November 6, 2025 16:27
@vchuravy vchuravy requested a review from wsmoses November 6, 2025 16:27
@vchuravy vchuravy requested a review from michel2323 November 6, 2025 19:21
@vchuravy
Copy link
Member Author

vchuravy commented Nov 6, 2025

I am going to merge this, but I am happy to revisit it.

@vchuravy vchuravy merged commit e099b56 into main Nov 6, 2025
49 of 52 checks passed
@vchuravy vchuravy deleted the vc/finalzer_support branch November 6, 2025 19:46
@wsmoses
Copy link
Member

wsmoses commented Nov 6, 2025

retrospective lgtm

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