Skip to content

Conversation

@tpapp
Copy link
Owner

@tpapp tpapp commented Dec 8, 2022

No description provided.

@tpapp tpapp merged commit 74b8d7e into master Dec 8, 2022
@tpapp tpapp deleted the tp/logdensityproblemsad branch December 8, 2022 11:56
@devmotion
Copy link
Contributor

Why does this change require Julia 1.8? AFAICT we can test Turing not on < 1.8 anymore with this change, unless we remove tests with DynamicHMC.

@tpapp
Copy link
Owner Author

tpapp commented Dec 9, 2022

I used 1.8 features in recent PRs, notably #170. While of course one can always work around anything, this made life much simpler, and some allocations got eliminated under the hood. In particular, JuliaLang/julia#43127 fixed a lot of bugs for me so I no longer need workarounds and can organize code more sanely.

@devmotion
Copy link
Contributor

I used 1.8 features in recent PRs, notably #170.

It's not obvious to me what changes in that PR require Julia 1.8. Can you explain what exactly broke Julia 1.6 and 1.7?

Generally, I agree that it is sometimes painful and not worth it trying to support (too) old Julia versions. So I assume by now most actively maintained packages that needed workarounds on Julia < 1.6 have bumped the compat bound to 1.6 (I am not completely on board with the SciML policy though that demands that support for Julia < 1.6 is dropped since I don't see the need if the package just works and is tested on older Julia version). Personally I think the LTS version is a good common ground since it makes the package system more accessible for people that work in a more restricted environment and can't update the Julia version as easily (or work on longer projects and don't update too often to avoid hunting down problems introduced by newer versions).

@tpapp
Copy link
Owner Author

tpapp commented Dec 9, 2022

Generally I would like to be considerate if people really, really need 1.6, but compiling a detailed list is exactly the kind of effort I am trying to avoid --- it would be tantamount to backporting stuff and peppering the code with @static if VERSION <= ... etc.

I am open to bringing back 1.6 support, but I would recommend that you just start tests on 1.6 and see what breaks. If I remember correctly, some test dependencies also need 1.8, but again compiling a detailed list is not something I have resources for at the moment.

I am happy to accept PRs unless they make the code really ugly again. Also, please open an issue for bringing back 1.6 support.

Regarding the argument about restricted environments: note that whatever versions are out there will keep working on 1.6 forever. People can just use them.

@devmotion
Copy link
Contributor

Tests passed locally with the updated LogDensityTestSuite, so I'm not sure what the problem was. Actually even the tests which are supposed to fail on Julia 1.6 passed locally: #174

@devmotion
Copy link
Contributor

The CI logs in this PR suggest that possibly the only issue was LogDensityTestSuite: https://github.com/tpapp/DynamicHMC.jl/actions/runs/3647513077/jobs/6160379208

@tpapp
Copy link
Owner Author

tpapp commented Dec 12, 2022

@devmotion, just want to say thank you for investigating and fixing this.

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.

3 participants