at-points: change at-points operators to use Chebyshev polynomials of the first kind (normalized)#1963
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
|
we could possibly squeeze an extra register out of the cuda and hip impls, since they use 3 doubles for the derivative calculation right now and we should only need two with this change. |
jeremylt
reviewed
May 5, 2026
jeremylt
reviewed
May 5, 2026
zatkins-dev
commented
May 5, 2026
zatkins-dev
commented
May 5, 2026
… the first kind (normalized)
zatkins-dev
force-pushed
the
zach/at-points-cheby-first-kind
branch
from
c170613 to
a835aab
Compare
jeremylt
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
Member
|
Nevermind, that's the CUDA/GCC-16 issue, all is good |
Collaborator
Author
|
I think I'm good with merging! |
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
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Purpose:
We're currently using Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind, which don't have their range bounded to the same [-1,1] as their domain. I'm really not sure why we would be using the second kind, since they're numerically less stable and have a more complicated derivative.
This doesn't cause any issues with tests here or in Ratel.
LLM/GenAI Disclosure:
None