fix(rl): accept numpy ints and reject bool in is_positive_integer#1552
Open
kitrakrev wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
fix(rl): accept numpy ints and reject bool in is_positive_integer#1552kitrakrev wants to merge 1 commit into
kitrakrev wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
kitrakrev
requested review from
abheesht17,
hgao327,
jiangyangmu,
lc5211,
s-noghabi,
sizhit2,
tianshub and
wang2yn84
as code owners
|
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
`is_positive_integer` previously rejected numpy integer scalars (e.g. `np.int64`) since `isinstance(np.int64(5), int)` is False, and silently accepted `True`/`False` since `bool` is a subclass of `int`. This change: - accepts `np.integer` scalars in addition to Python `int` - explicitly rejects `bool` values - preserves existing behavior for `None`, `0`, and negative values Adds a dedicated `IsPositiveIntegerTest` covering int, numpy ints, bool, float, str, None, zero, negatives, and error message format. Supersedes the stalled PRs google#903 and google#1000.
kitrakrev
force-pushed
the
fix-is-positive-integer-numpy-bool
branch
from
1f9167b to
62e2543
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
tunix.rl.utils.is_positive_integercurrently has two edge cases:isinstance(np.int64(5), int)isFalse, so passing any numpy scalar (common when values flow through JAX/numpy) raisesValueErrorfor a perfectly valid positive integer.True/False.boolis a subclass ofintin Python, soTruepasses the check andFalseis rejected only for being<= 0. Neither is semantically a valid positive integer in this context.This PR:
np.integerscalars in addition to PythonintboolvaluesNone,0, and negativesChanges
tunix/rl/utils.py— updateis_positive_integerlogic + docstringtests/rl/rl_utils_test.py— addIsPositiveIntegerTestwith 9 casesTest plan
python -m absl.testing tests/rl/rl_utils_test.py—IsPositiveIntegerTestpassesRelated
Supersedes the stalled PRs #903 and #1000 (both attempted variants of the same fix; neither landed). Closes the remaining edges on the original report in #902 / #944 (the
value.is_integer()crash itself is already fixed on main).