Skip to content

Conversation

oxinabox
Copy link
Member

Basically #660
though I implemented it on AbstractTangent.
Subtraction should be implemented the same.

We already have special cases for this on AbstructThunks, ZeroTangent and NotImplemented.
Potentially the AbstractThunk one could be removed. I don't think the ZeroTangent one could since strong zero

@@ -38,3 +38,6 @@ abstract type AbstractTangent end
Base.:+(x::AbstractTangent) = x

@inline Base.conj(x::AbstractTangent) = x

Base.:/(x::AbstractTangent, y) = x * inv(y)
Base.:\(x, y::AbstractTangent) = inv(x) * y
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

[JuliaFormatter] reported by reviewdog 🐶

Suggested change
Base.:\(x, y::AbstractTangent) = inv(x) * y
Base.:\(x, y::AbstractTangent) = inv(x) * y

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (2387dc1) 93.80% compared to head (0a3b900) 93.81%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #666      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.80%   93.81%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          15       15              
  Lines         985      987       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits          924      926       +2     
  Misses         61       61              

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

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.

2 participants