Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Use three-valued logic with missing values in ==(::Tuple, ::Tuple) #24963

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 14, 2017
Merged

Use three-valued logic with missing values in ==(::Tuple, ::Tuple) #24963

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
f40832d
Use three-valued logic with missing values in ==(::Tuple, ::Tuple)
nalimilan Dec 7, 2017
be38d94
Add equality test returning false even in the presence of missings
nalimilan Dec 7, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
12 changes: 8 additions & 4 deletions base/tuple.jl
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -268,12 +268,16 @@ function ==(t1::Tuple, t2::Tuple)
if length(t1) != length(t2)
return false
end
anymissing = false
for i = 1:length(t1)
if !(t1[i] == t2[i])
return false
end
eq = (t1[i] == t2[i])
if ismissing(eq)
anymissing = true
elseif !eq
return false
end
end
return true
return anymissing ? missing : true
end

const tuplehash_seed = UInt === UInt64 ? 0x77cfa1eef01bca90 : 0xf01bca90
Expand Down
16 changes: 16 additions & 0 deletions test/missing.jl
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -202,6 +202,7 @@ end
@test Union{Int, Missing}[1] == Union{Float64, Missing}[1.0]
@test Union{Int, Missing}[1] == [1.0]
@test Union{Bool, Missing}[true] == BitArray([true])
@test !([missing, 1] == [missing, 2])
@test !(Union{Int, Missing}[1] == [2])
@test !([1] == Union{Int, Missing}[2])
@test !(Union{Int, Missing}[1] == Union{Int, Missing}[2])
Expand All @@ -217,11 +218,26 @@ end
@test !(Union{Int, Missing}[1] != Union{Float64, Missing}[1.0])
@test !(Union{Int, Missing}[1] != [1.0])
@test !(Union{Bool, Missing}[true] != BitArray([true]))
@test [missing, 1] != [missing, 2]
@test Union{Int, Missing}[1] != [2]
@test [1] != Union{Int, Missing}[2]
@test Union{Int, Missing}[1] != Union{Int, Missing}[2]
end

@testset "== and != on tuples" begin
@test ismissing((1, missing) == (1, missing))
@test ismissing(("a", missing) == ("a", missing))
@test ismissing((missing,) == (missing,))
@test ismissing((missing, 2) == (1, missing))
@test !((missing, 1) == (missing, 2))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I could be missing something super obvious, but how is this different than the test a few lines down that does !=?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, it's the same since the fallback is defined using ==, but that's the assumption we're checking. :-)


@test ismissing((1, missing) != (1, missing))
@test ismissing(("a", missing) != ("a", missing))
@test ismissing((missing,) != (missing,))
@test ismissing((missing, 2) != (1, missing))
@test (missing, 1) != (missing, 2)
end

@testset "any & all" begin
@test any([true, missing])
@test any(x -> x == 1, [1, missing])
Expand Down