@Bob_Carpenter and I were trying to iron out issues with std::pow that popped up with the introduction of the stan versions of the standard library complex functions into stan::math. We have a solution we’d like other people to take a look at (it works – but we want to know if it is good C++ or wha…

[image] rok_cesnovar: I can handle that one. The generated code using std::log is in in ( [WIP] Add `using std::pow` to model code generator (Issue #1809 in math) by bbbales2 · Pull Request #2906 · stan-dev/stan · GitHub ) and there’s a pull to remove the mingw stuff from stan::math ( Added arit…

[image] bbbales2: @rok_cesnovar can you add a using std::log into the stanc3 code generator? The top of the .hpp generated by the old compiler looks like: Do you mean std::pow? Just checking, I am a bit confused now :) [image] bbbales2: This makes me wonder though – should stanc3 somehow…

PR open: https://github.com/stan-dev/stanc3/pull/492 If someone has time to review please do. One liner change and no OCaml knowledge needed.

[image] rok_cesnovar: Do you mean std::pow ? Just checking, I am a bit confused now :) Ooof, yes lol. [image] rok_cesnovar: PR open Thanks! I see @seantalts got it in.

[image] ChrisChiasson: I was suggesting that the using statements, which I presume are necessary for the “generated calculations” part, should go after the includes and the before main . That’s indeed where they’re going, though it’s a class definition, not a main in the generated code (the m…

It’s a couple months till the next release so probably time to talk through this issue if it’s going to be resolved in this window. The question here is: How should stan::math handle implementations of functions for which there are versions in the std namespace? I think the two workable options …

@bbbales2 , I’m a little confused from your question. I think some of the terminology used is not used properly and that’s making it unclear in spots… this particular issue depends on us really being clear on what things mean. I’m particular, the use of “specialization” is throwing me off. Do you ha…

@syclik this was the issue: https://github.com/stan-dev/math/issues/1809 that spawned this discussion. You’re right I’m using the word specialization wrong.

I’ll take a look at the issue. Mind clarifying what you mean in the question? Or is it going to be clear in the issue?

Using std::pow inside stan::math namespace

Developers

bbbales2 April 13, 2020, 5:42pm 21

This seems related: https://github.com/stan-dev/math/pull/1684 . Just adding it here for whenever we discuss this again in the future.

Edit: Also relevant: https://github.com/stan-dev/math/pull/1765

Topic		Replies	Views
Writing reliable templated code for both `var` and `double` instantiations Developers	9	829	March 13, 2019
External C++ function error compilation CmdStan cmdstan	12	1393	April 9, 2021
Fully functional std::complex specializations and overloads Developers complex-math	52	4302	December 16, 2019
Vignette for interfacing with external C++ code via rstan Developers features	9	1642	December 8, 2016
Generating all-doubles version of Stan function block Developers	31	2583	October 26, 2016

Using std::pow inside stan::math namespace

Related topics