We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
NaN
0.0
Standard arrays have the feature that lmul!(0.0, A) replaces NaNs with 0.0, consistent with BLAS:
lmul!(0.0, A)
julia> lmul!(0.0,fill(NaN,3,3)) 3×3 Array{Float64,2}: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
This is gone when generic_lmul! is called:
generic_lmul!
julia> lmul!(0,fill(NaN,3,3)) 3×3 Array{Float64,2}: NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
I'd propose fixing this inconsistency by making generic_lmul! follow the BLAS convention.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I tried to reproduce the problem and got following results julia> lmul!(0.0,fill(NaN,3,3))
julia> lmul!(0.0,fill(NaN,3,3))
NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN
Julia Version 1.1.0-DEV.823 Commit c3b2bbb (2018-12-06 10:55 UTC) Platform Info: OS: Linux (x86_64-linux-gnu) CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-6700HQ CPU @ 2.60GHz WORD_SIZE: 64 LIBM: libopenlibm LLVM: libLLVM-6.0.1 (ORCJIT, skylake)
Sorry, something went wrong.
Julia 1.1-pre has actually gone the other way and changed the behaviour for BLAS types. I think this issue can therefore be closed?
No branches or pull requests
Standard arrays have the feature that
lmul!(0.0, A)
replacesNaN
s with0.0
, consistent with BLAS:This is gone when
generic_lmul!
is called:I'd propose fixing this inconsistency by making
generic_lmul!
follow the BLAS convention.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: