DO NOT MERGE: v1.12 branch for comparison to master #202
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
nickrobinson251
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
4 times, most recently
from
966538b to
9da665d
Compare
d-netto
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
9da665d to
48a5871
Compare
nickrobinson251
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
48a5871 to
5974904
Compare
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
7 times, most recently
from
1cff7d7 to
1e6e20d
Compare
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
5 times, most recently
from
02e0f68 to
35024c5
Compare
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
4 times, most recently
from
fb189dc to
7e4f1cb
Compare
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
3 times, most recently
from
7eb4dc1 to
d4a2432
Compare
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
5 times, most recently
from
f36b557 to
4abc802
Compare
…59297) These modifications to the MethodTable should be performed at the "link-stage", after all user top-level code has executed. This should be closer to the upcoming 1.13 pipeline, which will move all top-level user code to its standard package execution context. This also makes any user-provided functionality for type printing available to the `TrimVerifier`. Resolves JuliaLang#59280.
…uliaLang#59298) Not sure why this wasn't using this before since the code is effectively identical, but this allows: ```julia @Assert false "$("Hello,") assertion!" ``` to be `--trim`-"compatible" (unfortunately by deleting the assertion message...)
…lgebra (JuliaLang#59299) We may want to move this changes to base proper. @LilithHafner should sort functions just always specialize on the `by`/`lt` params? It currently sometimes relies on inlining for good performance --------- Co-authored-by: Cody Tapscott <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Cody Tapscott <[email protected]>
…uliaLang#59232) This prevents accidentally registering hooks during the sysimage build that would persist to run-time (unlike what happens when registering hooks while building a pkgimage) ~~Required for JuliaLang/LinearAlgebra.jl#1407
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
46775af to
20a6db4
Compare
…7776) This still sort of errored correctly anyways (after breakage added from PR JuliaLang#56499), but that behavior should not be relied upon optimizations not breaking it when this is providing incorrect info to the compiler. Fix JuliaLang#57459 (cherry picked from commit a5abb6f)
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
20a6db4 to
b253782
Compare
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
b253782 to
f49a8a6
Compare
…m)` (JuliaLang#59343) The issue is that JET reported that in `libgfortran_version(p).major` the first arg of `getproperty` could be `nothing`. This is already checked in the previous line, but in a way that the compiler cannot remember until that call. Putting it into a variable should fix that. It would be great if this could get backported to at least 1.12 (1.10 and 1.11 would also be great), since that is where people try to use JET for their packages, and this reduces the Base noise in the output.
The fields of `StringIndexError` are abstractly typed, so there's no reason to specialize on a concrete type. The change seems like it could prevent some invalidation on loading user code. --------- Co-authored-by: Shuhei Kadowaki <[email protected]>
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
44cfff2 to
aff650b
Compare
…s from packages succeed
Prevent transparent huge pages (THP) overallocating pysical memory. Co-authored-by: Adnan Alhomssi <[email protected]>
Prepend `[signal (X) ]thread (Y) ` to each backtrace line that is displayed. Co-authored-by: Diogo Netto <[email protected]>
Also show the signal number when we have it.
Alternative to JuliaLang#58146. We want to compile a subset of the possible specializations of a function. To this end, we have a number of manually written `precompile` statements. Creating this list is, unfortunately, error-prone, and the list is also liable to going stale. Thus we'd like to validate each `precompile` statement in the list. The simple answer is, of course, to actually run the `precompile`s, and we naturally do so, but this takes time. We would like a relatively quick way to check the validity of a `precompile` statement. This is a dev-loop optimization, to allow us to check "is-precompilable" in unit tests. We can't use `hasmethod` as it has both false positives (too loose): ```julia julia> hasmethod(sum, (AbstractVector,)) true julia> precompile(sum, (AbstractVector,)) false julia> Base.isprecompilable(sum, (AbstractVector,)) # <- this PR false ``` and also false negatives (too strict): ```julia julia> bar(@nospecialize(x::AbstractVector{Int})) = 42 bar (generic function with 1 method) julia> hasmethod(bar, (AbstractVector,)) false julia> precompile(bar, (AbstractVector,)) true julia> Base.isprecompilable(bar, (AbstractVector,)) # <- this PR true ``` We can't use `hasmethod && isconcretetype` as it has false negatives (too strict): ```julia julia> has_concrete_method(f, argtypes) = all(isconcretetype, argtypes) && hasmethod(f, argtypes) has_concrete_method (generic function with 1 method) julia> has_concrete_method(bar, (AbstractVector,)) false julia> has_concrete_method(convert, (Type{Int}, Int32)) false julia> precompile(convert, (Type{Int}, Int32)) true julia> Base.isprecompilable(convert, (Type{Int}, Int32)) # <- this PR true ``` `Base.isprecompilable` is essentially `precompile` without the actual compilation.
DelveCI
force-pushed
the
v1.12.0-DEV+RAI
branch
from
aff650b to
f64b74f
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.
See also RAICode PR https://github.com/RelationalAI/raicode/pull/22602/commits