Skip to content

Conversation

@aviatesk
Copy link
Member

@aviatesk aviatesk commented Oct 1, 2025

Following up #58872.
Since e is potentially arbitrary runtime value, we should not specialize on it.

Since `e` is potentially arbitrary runtime value, we should not
specialize on it.
@aviatesk aviatesk added the backport 1.12 Change should be backported to release-1.12 label Oct 1, 2025
@aviatesk aviatesk requested a review from vtjnash October 1, 2025 15:44
@vtjnash
Copy link
Member

vtjnash commented Oct 1, 2025

Sure. This hack is slated for imminent deletion though, since these hacks are not relevant after #59165 (just waiting for a new LinearSolve release now).

@aviatesk
Copy link
Member Author

aviatesk commented Oct 1, 2025

Ok. Given that the branch won't be backported to 1.12, I believe this should be backported to make inference on 1.12 slightly better.

@aviatesk aviatesk merged commit 968b16c into master Oct 2, 2025
7 of 9 checks passed
@aviatesk aviatesk deleted the avi/nospecialize branch October 2, 2025 07:26
aviatesk added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2025
…59722)

Following up #58872.
Since `e` is potentially arbitrary runtime value, we should not
specialize on it.
@aviatesk aviatesk removed the backport 1.12 Change should be backported to release-1.12 label Oct 2, 2025
@aviatesk aviatesk mentioned this pull request Oct 2, 2025
47 tasks
KristofferC pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2025
…59722)

Following up #58872.
Since `e` is potentially arbitrary runtime value, we should not
specialize on it.
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.

2 participants