We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
┌ Info: Running IR test in a subprocess... │ cmd = `/Users/kristoffercarlsson/julia1.11/usr/bin/julia -C native -J/Users/kristoffercarlsson/julia1.11/usr/lib/julia/sys.dylib --depwarn=yes --check-bounds=yes -g1 --color=yes --startup-file=no --startup-file=no --color=yes --check-bounds=no --code-coverage=none --inline=yes` └ script = "/Users/kristoffercarlsson/JuliaPkgs/Setfield.jl/test/perf.jl" heads_lens = [:call, :call, :call, :call, :call, :call, :call, :call, :call, :new] heads_hand = [:call, :call, :call, :new] IR: Test Failed at /Users/kristoffercarlsson/JuliaPkgs/Setfield.jl/test/perf.jl:83 Expression: uniquecounts(heads_lens) == uniquecounts(heads_hand) Evaluated: Dict(:call => 9, :new => 1) == Dict(:call => 3, :new => 1)
A comment in the test says that this test might be too strict. But maybe there is a regression in some optimization that used to happen here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
probably makes sense to manually inspect @btime and @code_*
@btime
@code_*
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
A comment in the test says that this test might be too strict. But maybe there is a regression in some optimization that used to happen here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: