fixed findmax unconsistency #521
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
findmyway
approved these changes
Oct 7, 2021
Co-authored-by: Jun Tian <[email protected]>
|
@all-contributors please add @3rdCore for bug and code. |
|
I've put up a pull request to add @3rdCore! 🎉 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Following the discussion of the Issue #520, this is my proposition of solution for the bug on the
Base.findmaxfunction due to the recent changes on Julia Core package and JuliaLang/Compat.jl#748. (The find_all_max is not to be impacted by the recent changes)Originally, depending if the explorer with return the greedy choice or a random choice, the output was respectively :