splines already have a derivative implemented, so there isn't necessarily a need to FD on top of them#137
Merged
pavelkomarov merged 4 commits intomasterfrom Aug 8, 2025
Merged
Conversation
…rily a need to FD on top of them
Collaborator
Author
|
Executive decision: It makes more sense to use the inbuilt, analytic derivative machinery. This means splines are spiritually in the wrong place, to be addressed in #138, if we ever get around to it. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Addressing #136. I'm agnostic about this one. Splines don't usually rank as the best method, and in my experimentation it seems to be a coin toss whether we actually do better by eschewing FD here. Might be less hassle to leave it where it is, but it's a bit of an odd choice to do FD on top of a spline; I don't think it's what people would expect.