more test fixes #2491
more test fixes #2491
Conversation
penelopeysm
force-pushed
the
py/more-dppl-fixes
branch
from
22e5dd1 to
cb95ee1
Compare
| logdensity = DynamicPPL.setmodel(state.ldf, model, sampler.alg.adtype) | ||
| logdensity = DynamicPPL.LogDensityFunction( | ||
| model, state.ldf.varinfo, state.ldf.context; adtype=sampler.alg.adtype | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
setmodel technically still exists, but it doesn't take the adtype argument anymore, and i think it's clearer to reconstruct the LDF (which is what setmodel does anyway)
| @model function vdemo7() | ||
| x = Array{Real}(undef, N, N) | ||
| return x .~ [InverseGamma(2, 3) for i in 1:N] | ||
| return x ~ filldist(InverseGamma(2, 3), N, N) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm kind of unsure as to whether we really need to keep the vdemoN models around. As far as I can tell, they're just legacy tests that try out different 'forms' of vectorisation and presumably the timings that are printed are meant to be some marker of their performance. But surely this is covered by DynamicPPL demo models already? I personally wouldn't mind if we just deleted the entire block
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## mhauru/dppl-0.35 #2491 +/- ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage 29.77% 45.38% +15.60%
=====================================================
Files 21 21
Lines 1387 1397 +10
=====================================================
+ Hits 413 634 +221
+ Misses 974 763 -211 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
some more fixes to get more tests to pass, i commented on a couple of bits & the rest should be fairly self explanatory