Repository navigation
Fix type of AbstractFFTs.Plan for real-complex FFTs - #2504
Merged
Merged
Conversation
maleadt
force-pushed
the
jip/fftplan-type
branch
from
September 24, 2024 14:18
74801c5 to
fc3196e
Compare
Member
|
Thanks! |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
In AbstractFFTs.jl, the
Plan{T}abstract type is defined such thatTis the input type of the FFT. For example, a real-to-complex plan returned byplan_rfftshould be a subtype ofPlan{T}forTreal, while the inverse plan (complex-to-real) should be aPlan{Complex{T}}. This is satisfied in particular by plans created by FFTW.jl.Currently, the opposite is true for
CuFFTPlans:This PR attempts to fix this issue.