Add support for && operator

[github-actions[bot]]

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! :+1:"

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 93.85%. Comparing base (1267d57) to head (eefcc20).

Additional details and impacted files

[](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev) ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #923 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 93.83% 93.85% +0.02% ========================================== Files 55 55 Lines 7878 7892 +14 ========================================== + Hits 7392 7407 +15 + Misses 486 485 -1 ``` | [Files](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [lib/Differentiator/ReverseModeVisitor.cpp](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=lib%2FDifferentiator%2FReverseModeVisitor.cpp&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev#diff-bGliL0RpZmZlcmVudGlhdG9yL1JldmVyc2VNb2RlVmlzaXRvci5jcHA=) | `97.26% <100.00%> (+0.01%)` | :arrow_up: | ... and [1 file with indirect coverage changes](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923/indirect-changes?src=pr&el=tree-more&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev) | [Files](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [lib/Differentiator/ReverseModeVisitor.cpp](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=lib%2FDifferentiator%2FReverseModeVisitor.cpp&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev#diff-bGliL0RpZmZlcmVudGlhdG9yL1JldmVyc2VNb2RlVmlzaXRvci5jcHA=) | `97.26% <100.00%> (+0.01%)` | :arrow_up: | ... and [1 file with indirect coverage changes](https://app.codecov.io/gh/vgvassilev/clad/pull/923/indirect-changes?src=pr&el=tree-more&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=Vassil+Vassilev)

[github-actions[bot]]

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! :+1:"

[parth-07]

Please also improve the commit message. This guide might be helpful for improving the commit message: https://cbea.ms/git-commit/

[github-actions[bot]]

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! :+1:"

[vgvassilev]

@rohanjulka19, ping. Maybe you can take a look at https://github.com/vgvassilev/clad/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#creating-a-successfull-pull-request address @parth-07's comment.

[rohanjulka19]

https://github.com/vgvassilev/clad/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#creating-a-successfull-pull-request

oh I had already addressed them, follwing the guidelines mentioned in the provided link - https://cbea.ms/git-commit/

Regarding this - https://github.com/vgvassilev/clad/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#creating-a-successfull-pull-request

1. Currently there is no issue created for this I can link this with Incorrect differentiation of loop conditions in reverse mode #746 issue as this PR was opened as part of solution for this.

2. I haven't added tests I was hoping if parth is ok with the changes then I will add the tests otherwise it gets tedious to fix them again and again.

From next time will re-request review. I usually don't do that to prevent annoying the reviewer.

[vgvassilev]

2. I haven't added tests I was hoping if parth is ok with the changes then I will add the tests otherwise it gets tedious to fix them again and again.

That sounds backwards. We require tests as they help reviewers understand the overall intent of the change.

[rohanjulka19]

2. I haven't added tests I was hoping if parth is ok with the changes then I will add the tests otherwise it gets tedious to fix them again and again.

That sounds backwards. We require tests as they help reviewers understand the overall intent of the change.

Yeah I guess ok will add tests to this

[rohanjulka19]

Added Validation for Empty if block here - https://github.com/vgvassilev/clad/pull/952

Now in case of

if(a && b ) {}

the diff will be

double _d_cond1;
if(_cond0) { 
_cond1 = b 
}
_cond2 = _cond0 && _cond1;

Since I want the _cond1 expression inside the if block to be differentiated and not ignored that's why had to create a derivative variable of _cond1 and add it to m_Variables map.

[github-actions[bot]]

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! :+1:"

[vgvassilev]

Can you properly rebase this PR?

[github-actions[bot]]

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! :+1:"

[github-actions[bot]]

clang-tidy review says "All clean, LGTM! :+1:"