Skip to content

Conversation

@devmotion
Copy link
Contributor

On the master branch:

julia> using Symbolics

julia> @variables x y;

julia> Base.remove_linenums!(build_function(x^y, [x, y]))
:(function (ˍ₋arg1,)
      begin
          (^)(ˍ₋arg1[1], ˍ₋arg1[2])
      end
  end)

With this PR:

julia> using Symbolics

julia> @variables x y;

julia> Base.remove_linenums!(build_function(x^y, [x, y]))
:(function (ˍ₋arg1,)
      begin
          (NaNMath.pow)(ˍ₋arg1[1], ˍ₋arg1[2])
      end
  end)

@devmotion
Copy link
Contributor Author

The Symbolics integration test failure seems harmless - apparently there's a test that compares an expression with a reference which includes ^, but with this PR the resulting expression uses (as desired) NaNMath.pow instead of ^.

@devmotion devmotion closed this Dec 16, 2024
@devmotion devmotion reopened this Dec 16, 2024
@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 226dd4f into JuliaSymbolics:master Jan 8, 2025
12 of 20 checks passed
@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

Submit the downstream test fix

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.

2 participants