# Is this \`Test.detect\_unbound\_args\` result valid or a bug?

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/is-this-test-detect-unbound-args-result-valid-or-a-bug/96987
**Category:** General Usage
**Tags:** potential-bug
**Created:** [April 2, 2023, 10:08pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/is-this-test-detect-unbound-args-result-valid-or-a-bug/96987 "2023-04-02T22:08:18Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Elrod](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/elrod/32/22461_2.png) [@Elrod](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Elrod)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2023, 2:50am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/is-this-test-detect-unbound-args-result-valid-or-a-bug/96987/2 "2023-04-03T02:50:04Z")

</div>

> [@nsajko](#):
>
> Should this be considered a bug? If not, `detect_unbound_args` seems useless, as this seems like a very basic false positive.

It’s definitely annoying. I don’t even know how to call the second method with an empty tuple using `invoke`.

If you want to avoid it, instead write

```julia
f(::Tuple{F,Vararg{F,nMinus1}}) where {F,nMinus1} = ...

```

I do this. `detect_unbound_args` is useful, but less so now that you get warnings during precompilation.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/is-this-test-detect-unbound-args-result-valid-or-a-bug/96987)._