Remove projection rule for VectorOfArray - #377
Merged
Merged
Conversation
| return VectorOfArray(x) | ||
| end | ||
| end | ||
| # function ChainRulesCore.ProjectTo(a::AbstractVectorOfArray) |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please don't comment out code like this. You've done it in a few PRs. Just remove the code if it's to be removed.
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Checklist
contributor guidelines, in particular the SciML Style Guide and
COLPRAC.
Additional context
The current rule does not account for the various Tangent types that can be seen when working with downstream packages (specifically note AD'ing through observable functions via SII). It is much better to remove the rule and let AD take care of picking out the right fields etc. If its preferred to retain the rule (to get the VectorOfArray type returned in the reverse pass), then we will need to handle that elsewhere. For now, let's check for breakages in CI.
Add any other context about the problem here.