Skip to content

Comments

Fix JET errors around matching methods for run_work_thunk(...)#168

Closed
DilumAluthge wants to merge 4 commits intomasterfrom
dpa/cherrypick-jet-run_work_thunk
Closed

Fix JET errors around matching methods for run_work_thunk(...)#168
DilumAluthge wants to merge 4 commits intomasterfrom
dpa/cherrypick-jet-run_work_thunk

Conversation

@DilumAluthge
Copy link
Member

@DilumAluthge DilumAluthge commented Feb 12, 2026

  │┌ run_work_thunk(rv::Distributed.RemoteValue, thunk::Bool) @ Distributed /workpath/Distributed.jl/src/process_messages.jl:79
  ││ no matching method found `run_work_thunk(::Bool, ::Bool)`: Distributed.run_work_thunk(thunk::Bool, false)
  │└────────────────────

```
  │┌ run_work_thunk(rv::Distributed.RemoteValue, thunk::Bool) @ Distributed /workpath/Distributed.jl/src/process_messages.jl:79
  ││ no matching method found `run_work_thunk(::Bool, ::Bool)`: Distributed.run_work_thunk(thunk::Bool, false)
  │└────────────────────
```

(cherry picked from commit 402d38b)
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 79.45%. Comparing base (d06aa73) to head (635f414).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #168   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.45%   79.45%           
=======================================
  Files          10       10           
  Lines        1957     1957           
=======================================
  Hits         1555     1555           
  Misses        402      402           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

return result
end
function run_work_thunk(rv::RemoteValue, thunk)
function run_work_thunk(rv::RemoteValue, thunk::Function)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure about this because theoretically I think this could receive a callable struct as well. Would Base.Callable work?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point. I think Base.Callable should still work, since it still excludes Bool.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've broadened thunk::Function to thunk::Base.Callable (43c0a3d and 104fd7c).

And I manually confirmed that this is still sufficient to fix the JET error.

@DilumAluthge
Copy link
Member Author

Hmmm. I want to think about this a bit more.

@DilumAluthge
Copy link
Member Author

I think #181 might be better.

@DilumAluthge
Copy link
Member Author

Closing in favor of #181

@DilumAluthge DilumAluthge deleted the dpa/cherrypick-jet-run_work_thunk branch February 21, 2026 08:21
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