I just spend a lot of time figuring out why this function here function solve(ncgm::NeoclassicalGrowth, vp::ValueCoeffs{T}; tol::Float64 = 1e-06, maxiter::Int = 5000, dampen::Float64 = 1, nskipprint::Int = 1, verbose::Bool = true) where {T <: SolutionMethod} would not for all of my…

How exactly are you calling solve function so that it gives this particular error?

Please provide an MWE. [image] Please read: make it easier to help you Meta Discussion Welcome to the Julia Discourse! We are enthusiastic about helping Julia programmers, both beginner and experienced. This public service announcement (PSA) outlines best practices when a…

my problem is solved. there was a stupid typo dampen::Float64 = 1 which generated that weird error. The error message is a problem though. Here is how you can generate it. I downloaded this notebook and extracted all code from from it: QuantEcon – Notes I upgraded the code (0.6) to julia 1.1 by f…

Thanks for posting the script, but this is hardly a MWE :wink: I think your problem can be boiled down to julia> f(; x::Float64 = 1) = :works f (generic function with 1 method) julia> f() ERROR: MethodError: no method matching #f#3(::Int64, ::typeof(f)) Closest candidates are: #f#3(::Float64, :…

[image] Tamas_Papp: f(; x::Float64 = 1) = :works well, that’s not quite it. that’s more like it: julia> f(y::Float64; x::Float64 = 1) = :works f (generic function with 2 methods) julia> f(1.0) ERROR: MethodError: no method matching #f#30(::Int64, ::typeof(f), ::Float64) Closest candidates a…

It is colored in red in the candidate, so that part is correct. As I said above, not using the internal form with the # in the error message would be an improvement. Cf Types on kwargs can lead to confusing situations opened 10:16PM - 20 …

I’m not following. Here is how I think this should be: g(x::Float64,y::Float64) = x julia> g(1.0,2) ERROR: MethodError: no method matching g(::Float64, ::Int64) Closest candidates are: g(::Float64, ::Float64) at REPL[11]:100: [42] The red bit is of course the part that is wrong and needs to be…

[image] floswald: The red bit is of course the part that is wrong and needs to be changed The problem is not this, but that an internal implementation detail leaks into the error message. Currently (on v"1.2.0-DEV.608") f(x; y = z) is translated to a call signature g((y = z, ), f, x) whe…

that’s good to know. i don’t care so much about that printing really. I think this inconsistency is really confusing. just for the record, i am talking about this inconsistency julia> f(x::Float64;y::Int = 1.0) = x f (generic function with 1 method) julia> g(x::Float64,y::Int) = x g (generic funct…

[image] floswald: the first error message should not say that there is a candidate f with an Int as first argument available But, if you read carefully, it doesn’t. It refers to #f#5, not f. The main issue is that you should not see #f#5 (because, again, it is just an implementation detail), …

Keyword function error inverts position of arguments?

General Usage

Tamas_Papp April 1, 2019, 6:45am 3

Please provide an MWE.

Topic		Replies	Views
Unexpected sensitivity to order of method definitions General Usage	11	490	November 22, 2023
Confusing dispatch problem General Usage	9	480	February 6, 2023
Define f with keyword arguments: function f does not accept keyword arguments New to Julia	12	2944	May 13, 2019
Kwargs unexpected (?) error General Usage kwargs	2	73	October 31, 2024
I'm confused about methods General Usage	21	910	October 16, 2020

Keyword function error inverts position of arguments?

Related topics