-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
New issue
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
Support IrrationalConstants 0.2 #44
Conversation
Codecov ReportPatch coverage has no change and project coverage change:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #44 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.23% 91.66% -3.58%
==========================================
Files 1 1
Lines 21 12 -9
==========================================
- Hits 20 11 -9
Misses 1 1
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
test/runtests.jl
Outdated
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ using Tau | |||
using Test | |||
|
|||
@testset "self-identity" begin | |||
@test tau isa Irrational{:twoπ} | |||
@test tau isa Tau.IrrationalConstants.Twoπ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Double checking: this works with both IrrationalConstants
0.1 and 0.2?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, no, the test doesn't. Of course, the package/constant works with either version but it's a different type since IrrationalConstants changed the types. I guess a better test might be based on twoπ
directly:
@test tau isa Tau.IrrationalConstants.Twoπ | |
@test tau === Tau.IrrationalConstants.twoπ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I changed it, I think it's better now @giordano.
The question made me wonder whether we should be also make a breaking release, as we did in IrrationalConstants, just to be sure that the different type does not break dispatches of some user. It seems less likely though, at least according to Juliahub no packages depend on Tau.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we have the following two possibilities.
- Do not consider this PR as breaking, and update the compat table with
0.1, 0.2
. - Consider this PR as breaking, and update the compat table with
0.2
.
The current behaviour in this PR
- Consider this PR as breaking, and update the compat table with
0.1, 0.2
.
is inconsistent because users may experience surprising type changes in the following situation.
- The user depends on Tau.jl v2.0.0.
- The user depends on SomePkg.jl that depends on IrrationalConstants.jl.
- SomePkg.jl updates its compat table of IrrationalConstants.jl from
0.1
to0.1, 0.2
without a breaking change. - Then, the type of
Tau.tau
will be changed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I guess you're right and it's safer to drop support for IrrationalConstants 0.1.
Project.toml
Outdated
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@ | |||
name = "Tau" | |||
uuid = "c544e3c2-d3e5-5802-ac44-44683f340e4a" | |||
version = "1.0.0" | |||
version = "1.1.0" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To be on the safe side since types change and hence possibly dispatches are broken:
version = "1.1.0" | |
version = "2.0.0" |
No description provided.