Which version of julia? If you're not using 0.5, try it and you might be pleased.
You can also launch `julia --inline=no`, which occasionally still remains useful. --Tim On Tuesday, September 13, 2016 8:55:58 AM CDT Tim Wheeler wrote: > Hi Julia Users, > > So I was looking at ConjugatePriors.jl and trying to resolve its problems > with respect to the latest Distributions.jl. As discussed in issue 11 > <https://github.com/JuliaStats/ConjugatePriors.jl/issues/11>, testing > ConjugatePriors after removing the REQUIRE bounds results in: > > MethodError: no method matching > _rand!(::Distributions.MvNormalCanon{PDMats.PDMat{Float64,Array{Float64,2}}, > Array{Float64,1}}, > ::Array{Float64,1}) on line 52 of conjugates_mvnormal.jl > > <https://github.com/JuliaStats/ConjugatePriors.jl/blob/master/test/conjugate > s_mvnormal.jl#L52>. and line 25 of fallbacks.jl > > If you check that line you find the following: > > posterior_randmodel(pri, G::IncompleteFormulation, x) = complete(G, pri, > posterior_rand(pri, G, x)) > > Okay, the problem isn't really there. The call to posterior_rand is inlined > (I assume), so it doesn't show up in the test stack trace. So we manually > go to: > > posterior_rand(pri, G::IncompleteFormulation, x) = Base.rand(posterior_canon > (pri, G, x)) > > > This also isn't the problem, at least not directly. > > In fact, the also inlined call to posterior_canon(pri, G, x) works fine. It > returns an MvNormalCanon object and then Base.rand is called. > > This calls some inlined functions, which eventually call > Base._rand!(MvNormalCanon, x::Vector), which leads to the problem, namely > that _rand!(MvNormalCannon, x::Matrix) is all that is defined. > > But why was that so hard to discover? Why does only line 25 of fallbacks,jl > show up in the error stack trace? Was there a better way to debug this?
