split a string basic type away from symbolBase#203
Merged
Conversation
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Support for strings is still rudimentary. In issue #201 we saw that even returning a string triggered a warning because the type checking for return objects was based on the basic types of double, integer, and logical. However the string type also hijacked the same symbol type, resulting in an error in the Return error checking. Strings are a somewhat hybrid case because there is some commonality, especially if we can use Eigen Tensors to store and access non-scalars for strings and possible other kinds of elements. So this PR takes the approach of inserting a layer into the symbol class hierarchy. The new layer serves as a base class for any core type that might be scalar or not. Then symbolBasic (for double, integer, and logical, and also AD) derives from that, and a new symbolBasicString also derives from that. It meant that all code checking on or working with the symbolBasic type was not broken.
In addition I separated void into its own symbol class rather than also hijacking a special case of symbolBasic for this.
Tests passed, so this looks good to go.
Fixes #201