Skip to content

Conversation

@nsajko
Copy link

@nsajko nsajko commented Sep 8, 2025

As documented, the intended way to implement > is to add a method to <. Similarly with >=. A package should never add a method to either > or >=.

The != function should also usually not get any new methods.

EDIT: some of the methods here behave differently than Julia's generic fallback. These methods are preserved with this change to prevent breakage.

@JeffreySarnoff
Copy link
Owner

Thank you.
This was done intentionally, to preserve whatever logic the Arb C library implementation imposes.
As ArbReal is an interval type, there are subtle issues with the comparisons. It may be that the default way of defining them matches the internals -- I do not know offhand. Your thoughts.

@nsajko

This comment was marked as outdated.

@nsajko

This comment was marked as outdated.

@nsajko
Copy link
Author

nsajko commented Sep 9, 2025

I reverted all deletions that might impact behavior. Now this PR just deletes methods such that there is obviously no change in behavior.

As documented, the intended way to implement `>` is to add a method to
`<`. Similarly with `>=`. A package should never add a method to either
`>` or `>=`.
@nsajko nsajko force-pushed the prevent_adding_methods_fix branch from d4d51bb to c8c03eb Compare September 9, 2025 16:08
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