Herman Sletmoen

The bad workaround I was using here no longer works. I think maybe #3957 changed how `remake` handles parameter types.

@AayushSabharwal Is there a nice way to accomplish what I want here? Here is the shortest example I can think of: ```julia using ModelingToolkit, OrdinaryDiffEq using ModelingToolkit: t_nounits as t,...

Thanks, this is very very close to what I want! The problem I see is that it operates on the `System`, and it would be very expensive in my application...

I see :/ Do you mean that the indexing of `prob.p.nonnumeric[i][j]` in general changes, since it groups nonnumeric parameters of equal types?

> It would be helpful if users could opt in to having the printing of the symbolic term also depend on the type and metadata. I also think being able...

Yeah, I got started on this and left it hanging a little. Will see if I can get back on it in not too long.

Can you help me understand how the downstream testing works? For example, [IntegrationTest / OrdinaryDiffEq.jl/Interface/1 (pull_request)](https://github.com/SciML/SciMLBase.jl/actions/runs/14602553998/job/41007048067?pr=988) passes when I `dev OrdinaryDiffEq SciMLBase` locally (both at or ahead of the latest...

Okay, thank you. Does that mean it's equivalent to an environment where SciMLBase and OrdinaryDiffEq are both `dev`ed and on the tip of master? I just rebased onto the latest...

I was missing an in-place dispatch for `t::Number`, so more tests should pass now... I'm still confused about [this MethodError vs BoundsError](https://github.com/SciML/SciMLBase.jl/actions/runs/14674307937/job/41188182534?pr=988#step:6:1404), though. It might not be a problem with...

> That's because tests are run with --bounds-check=true, so the difference of force enabling bounds check is making that a bounds check error on the indexing of a scalar. Oh,...