83b09dda-53f5-4663-b44c-87fd2a9a8717
commented
4 years ago I think this is reabstraction troubles.
The call to `doGradient` passes the following differentiable_function:
%77 = differentiable_function [parameters 0] %65 : $@noescape @callee_guaranteed @substituted <τ_0_0> (@in_guaranteed τ_0_0) -> Double for <Array<Double>> with_derivative {
%71 : $@noescape @callee_guaranteed @substituted <τ_0_0> (@in_guaranteed τ_0_0) -> (Double, @owned @callee_guaranteed (@guaranteed Array<Double>.DifferentiableView) -> Double) for <Array<Double>>,
%76 : $@noescape @callee_guaranteed @substituted <τ_0_0> (@in_guaranteed τ_0_0) -> (Double, @owned @callee_guaranteed (Double) -> @owned Array<Double>.DifferentiableView) for <Array<Double>>
}However, the `doGradient` SIL expects the passed-in function to have types:
original: $@convention(thin) <τ_0_0 where τ_0_0 : Differentiable, τ_0_0.TangentVector == Array<Double>.DifferentiableView> (@in_guaranteed τ_0_0) -> Double
jvp: $@convention(thin) <τ_0_0 where τ_0_0 : Differentiable, τ_0_0.TangentVector == Array<Double>.DifferentiableView> (@in_guaranteed τ_0_0) -> (Double, @owned @callee_guaranteed (@in_guaranteed Array<Double>.DifferentiableView) -> Double)
vjp: <τ_0_0 where τ_0_0 : Differentiable, τ_0_0.TangentVector == Array<Double>.DifferentiableView> (@in_guaranteed τ_0_0) -> (Double, @owned @callee_guaranteed (Double) -> @out Array<Double>.DifferentiableView)Notice that the differential parameter is `@guaranteed` in the caller and `@in_guaranteed` in the callee! Similarly, the pullback result is `@owned` in the caller and `@out` in the callee.
Now I will try to figure out why the caller and callee disagree on the abstraction pattern.
jkshtj
Additional Detail from JIRA
| | | |------------------|-----------------| |Votes | 0 | |Component/s | | |Labels | Bug, AutoDiff | |Assignee | @marcrasi | |Priority | Medium | md5: ad25ac5743834fb73c83e843d1b30711relates to:
Issue Description:
I couldn't get a useful backtrace out of LLDB.