Skip to content

Bump compat for OrdinaryDiffEq v7 / SciMLBase v3 ecosystem#120

Merged
ChrisRackauckas merged 2 commits into
SciML:mainfrom
ChrisRackauckas-Claude:bump-ordinarydiffeq-v7-ecosystem
May 9, 2026
Merged

Bump compat for OrdinaryDiffEq v7 / SciMLBase v3 ecosystem#120
ChrisRackauckas merged 2 commits into
SciML:mainfrom
ChrisRackauckas-Claude:bump-ordinarydiffeq-v7-ecosystem

Conversation

@ChrisRackauckas-Claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

Bumps compat entries to allow the OrdinaryDiffEq v7 / SciMLBase v3 ecosystem (refs SciML/OrdinaryDiffEq.jl#3562, SciML/OrdinaryDiffEq.jl#3565 and NEWS.md):

  • Project.toml: OrdinaryDiffEqVerner "1.2""1, 2" (v2 is the OrdinaryDiffEq v7-compatible release)
  • docs/Project.toml: OrdinaryDiffEqTsit5 "1""1, 2"
  • docs/Project.toml: OrdinaryDiffEqVerner "1""1, 2"
  • docs/Project.toml: SciMLBase "2""2, 3"

No source/test code changes needed

Audited all src/ and test/ files for breaking patterns from the v7/v3 ecosystem:

  • No usage of removed SciMLBase v2 APIs (u_modified!, DEAlgorithm, DEProblem, DESolution, sol.destats, has_destats)
  • SciMLBase.FullSpecialize and SciMLBase.successful_retcode remain valid in SciMLBase v3
  • No sol[i] indexing patterns that would break under RecursiveArrayTools v4

Test plan

  • CI passes on GitHub with new compat bounds
  • Verify resolver picks up OrdinaryDiffEqVerner v2 when used with the new ecosystem

- OrdinaryDiffEqVerner: "1.2" → "1, 2" to allow v2 (part of OrdinaryDiffEq v7 ecosystem)
- docs: OrdinaryDiffEqTsit5: "1" → "1, 2"
- docs: OrdinaryDiffEqVerner: "1" → "1, 2"
- docs: SciMLBase: "2" → "2, 3"

No source code changes required: no deprecated SciMLBase v2 APIs
(u_modified!, DEAlgorithm, sol.destats, etc.) are used in src/ or tests.
SciMLBase.FullSpecialize and SciMLBase.successful_retcode remain valid in v3.

Refs: SciML/OrdinaryDiffEq.jl#3562, SciML/OrdinaryDiffEq.jl#3565

Co-Authored-By: Chris Rackauckas <accounts@chrisrackauckas.com>
The format-check workflow invoked fredrikekre/runic-action@v1 without
first installing Julia, so the action's dependency-check step bailed
out with "julia is a required dependency but does not seem to be
available" before any code was inspected. This masked pre-existing
Runic violations in src/ and test/.

- .github/workflows/FormatCheck.yml: add julia-actions/setup-julia@v2
  before the runic-action step so Julia is on PATH.
- src/ModelingToolkitNeuralNets.jl, src/nn_par_accessors.jl,
  test/nn_ps_accessors.jl, test/symbolicnn_macro.jl: apply
  `runic --inplace` to the formatting violations the action will now
  flag (whitespace around operators, explicit `return` on
  single-statement function bodies, line-wrapping of long expressions,
  trimming a duplicated blank line). All changes are formatting-only;
  no semantic changes.

Co-Authored-By: Chris Rackauckas <accounts@chrisrackauckas.com>
@ChrisRackauckas-Claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Pushed c21c731 to fix format-check CI:

  1. Root cause of format-check failure: .github/workflows/FormatCheck.yml invoked fredrikekre/runic-action@v1 without first installing Julia, so the action's dependency check exited with julia is a required dependency but does not seem to be available. This had been silently masking pre-existing Runic violations on main.
  2. Fix: added julia-actions/setup-julia@v2 before the runic step, then ran runic --inplace over src/ and test/ to address the formatting violations the action will now actually flag (whitespace around operators, explicit return on single-statement bodies, line-wrapping of long expressions, one duplicated blank line).
  3. The same FormatCheck.yml bug exists in ModelingToolkit.jl and likely other SciML repos — worth a follow-up sweep.

format-check is now green.

The other two failures on the previous CI run are not caused by this PR:

@ChrisRackauckas ChrisRackauckas merged commit 299931c into SciML:main May 9, 2026
8 of 10 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants