Skip to content
New issue

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

Recent PR broke the API #56

Closed
gdalle opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #57
Closed

Recent PR broke the API #56

gdalle opened this issue May 16, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #57
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@gdalle
Copy link
Collaborator

gdalle commented May 16, 2024

The recent PR #54 by @adrhill, which was merged by @ChrisRackauckas before I had time to review it, makes things disappear from the public API in a breaking way. In Julia, the documentation is the public API, so we cannot edit docstrings quite however we want.

The things that need to be done are:

  • Explicitly document "fields" instead of "keyword arguments", because otherwise users of ADTypes.jl (like DifferentiationInterface.jl) have no API-sanctioned way to access the specifics of a backend object
  • Same for type parameters like AutoChainRules{RC}, which have disappeared in the PR.

Essentially, I'd prefer to revert the entire PR and then add back this precision everywhere:

Struct used to select the ... backend for automatic differentiation.
Exported from ADTypes.jl
@gdalle gdalle added the bug Something isn't working label May 16, 2024
@adrhill
Copy link
Contributor

adrhill commented May 16, 2024

In Julia, the documentation is the public API, so we cannot edit docstrings quite however we want.

I understand the issue. #54 changed the documentation from "developer docs" to "user docs" and I didn't have this in mind.
However, since ADTypes are user-facing, I would argue that we need both (see #31). So I think a full revert isn't a long-term solution either.

@gdalle
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gdalle commented May 16, 2024

That's why I said we can add back the user precision

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants