Skip to content

Conversation

@albertomercurio
Copy link
Owner

Fixes #10.

There are still some problems with Reactant.jl though.

@github-actions
Copy link

🤖 Hi @albertomercurio, I've received your request, and I'm working on it now! You can track my progress in the logs for more details.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 17, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.40%. Comparing base (862b4d5) to head (a8875c4).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #28      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.64%   82.40%   -0.25%     
==========================================
  Files          14       13       -1     
  Lines         801      773      -28     
==========================================
- Hits          662      637      -25     
+ Misses        139      136       -3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

📋 Review Summary

This pull request improves type stability by enforcing element type consistency in the sparse array constructors. The removal of Reactant.jl support is also noted. The changes are generally good, but there are a few minor suggestions for improving consistency and readability.

🔍 General Feedback

  • The use of copy in the constructors is inconsistent across the different sparse matrix types. It's recommended to make this behavior consistent.
  • The docstrings for the sparse matrix types could be simplified for better readability.

Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️

Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark 'Benchmark Results'.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.30.

Benchmark suite Current: a8875c4 Previous: c26f8a5 Ratio
Sparse Vector/JLArray/Sum 22782 ns 16145.5 ns 1.41
Kronecker Product/Array/CSC 539683 ns 407425 ns 1.32

This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.

Copy link

@gdalle gdalle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would this be enough to get Reactant working?

@albertomercurio
Copy link
Owner Author

Unfortunately the type relaxation didn't help.

albertomercurio and others added 5 commits November 18, 2025 00:13
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
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.

Force fields to have the same eltype

3 participants