inference: apply tmerge limit elementwise to the Union #50927
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
vtjnash
added
needs tests
This was referenced Aug 15, 2023
oscardssmith
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 17, 2023
…0929) This is the part of #50927 required to fix #49249. Specifically, before this change `tmerge(Tuple{Any, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int}}` but `tmerge(Tuple{BIG_UNION, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Any}}`. This feels bad intuitively because giving the compiler more type information led it to forget type information that it already knew about, and is especially damaging because it led to unnecessary type instability when iterating tuples with complex element types (because the iterator state should be inferrable as an `Int` even if you have no idea what the tuple type is). This is tagged for backport to 1.10 since it is a relatively unobtrusive change and it fixes the string regression in a more proper way.
vtjnash
pushed a commit
to vtjnash/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 18, 2023
…liaLang#50929) This is the part of JuliaLang#50927 required to fix JuliaLang#49249. Specifically, before this change `tmerge(Tuple{Any, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int}}` but `tmerge(Tuple{BIG_UNION, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Any}}`. This feels bad intuitively because giving the compiler more type information led it to forget type information that it already knew about, and is especially damaging because it led to unnecessary type instability when iterating tuples with complex element types (because the iterator state should be inferrable as an `Int` even if you have no idea what the tuple type is). This is tagged for backport to 1.10 since it is a relatively unobtrusive change and it fixes the string regression in a more proper way.
vtjnash
pushed a commit
to vtjnash/julia
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 18, 2023
…liaLang#50929) This is the part of JuliaLang#50927 required to fix JuliaLang#49249. Specifically, before this change `tmerge(Tuple{Any, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int}}` but `tmerge(Tuple{BIG_UNION, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Any}}`. This feels bad intuitively because giving the compiler more type information led it to forget type information that it already knew about, and is especially damaging because it led to unnecessary type instability when iterating tuples with complex element types (because the iterator state should be inferrable as an `Int` even if you have no idea what the tuple type is). This is tagged for backport to 1.10 since it is a relatively unobtrusive change and it fixes the string regression in a more proper way.
IanButterworth
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 19, 2023
…0929) This is the part of #50927 required to fix #49249. Specifically, before this change `tmerge(Tuple{Any, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int}}` but `tmerge(Tuple{BIG_UNION, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Any}}`. This feels bad intuitively because giving the compiler more type information led it to forget type information that it already knew about, and is especially damaging because it led to unnecessary type instability when iterating tuples with complex element types (because the iterator state should be inferrable as an `Int` even if you have no idea what the tuple type is). This is tagged for backport to 1.10 since it is a relatively unobtrusive change and it fixes the string regression in a more proper way. (cherry picked from commit 6e2e6d0)
This allows forming larger unions, as long as each element in the Union
is both relatively distinct and relatively simple. For example:
tmerge(Base.BitSigned, Nothing) == Union{Nothing, Int128, Int16, Int32, Int64, Int8}
tmerge(Tuple{Base.BitSigned, Int}, Nothing) == Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int64}}
tmerge(AbstractVector{Int}, Vector) == AbstractVector
Disables a test from dc8d885.
Co-authored-by: Oscar Smith <oscardssmith@gmail.com>
vtjnash
force-pushed
the
jn/tmerge-elementwise
branch
from
5c008b5
to
f4ac759
Compare
vtjnash
force-pushed
the
jn/tmerge-elementwise
branch
from
416b240
to
bae558c
Compare
|
@nanosoldier |
|
@nanosoldier |
vtjnash
added
compiler:inference
|
Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here. |
|
Seems that this will eliminate an allocation in sparse matmul, but otherwise does not change anything. |
|
Doesn't seem to have any regressions in inference so I guess it's still worth |
|
The package evaluation job you requested has completed - possible new issues were detected. |
Can this be |
JeffBezanson
approved these changes
Sep 15, 2023
|
Yeah, that was changed in a later version of the PR at Oscar's insistence, and updated in the commit messages but not the PR text. Initially I didn't have the tname_intersection function returning the intersection, so it couldn't match up the parameters. |
NHDaly
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 20, 2023
This allows forming larger unions, as long as each element in the Union
is both relatively distinct and relatively simple. For example:
tmerge(Base.BitSigned, Nothing) == Union{Nothing, Int128, Int16, Int32, Int64, Int8}
tmerge(Tuple{Base.BitSigned, Int}, Nothing) == Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int64}}
tmerge(AbstractVector{Int}, Vector) == AbstractVector
Disables a test from dc8d885, which does not seem possible to handle currently.
This makes somewhat drastic changes to make this algorithm more
commutative and simpler, since we dropped the final widening to `Any`.
Co-authored-by: pchintalapudi <34727397+pchintalapudi@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Oscar Smith <oscardssmith@gmail.com>
nalimilan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 5, 2023
…0929) This is the part of #50927 required to fix #49249. Specifically, before this change `tmerge(Tuple{Any, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Int}}` but `tmerge(Tuple{BIG_UNION, Int}, Nothing)` would be `Union{Nothing, Tuple{Any, Any}}`. This feels bad intuitively because giving the compiler more type information led it to forget type information that it already knew about, and is especially damaging because it led to unnecessary type instability when iterating tuples with complex element types (because the iterator state should be inferrable as an `Int` even if you have no idea what the tuple type is). This is tagged for backport to 1.10 since it is a relatively unobtrusive change and it fixes the string regression in a more proper way. (cherry picked from commit 6e2e6d0)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This allows forming larger unions, as long as each element in the Union is both relatively distinct and relatively simple. For example: