Frames White

This basically undoes #435

Indeed, but this can track that.

We do still want this

OK, I can drop that test, for now Can you open an issue about that you said for enforcing?

This feels like a bug in julia itself. Because order of loading shouldn't have an effect on what is defined inside Base...

I think commutivity for scalar multiplication probably a requirement i am going to add to differentials, in ChainRules. Because noone wants to reason through this when writing rules. c.f. https://github.com/JuliaDiff/ChainRules.jl/pull/133

I have had a few times this kinda crazy idea of Rules not wrapping closures, but instead being there own singleton functors, that are a lot like closures. I am...

I believe the problem is boxing. ``` julia> function foo() x=2 g()=x+=1 h()=x-=1 g,h end foo (generic function with 2 methods) julia> g1,h1 = foo() (getfield(Main, Symbol("#g#25"))(Core.Box(2)), getfield(Main, Symbol("#h#26"))(Cor e.Box(2)))...

To some approximation: ``` macro Rule(expr) # Add a rule cache check here maybe. closes_over = vars_scan(expr) sig, body = sigbody_split_function(expr) neobody = replace(body, Dict(var=>Expr(:., rule, var) for var in...

The macro i posted is insane though, and needs some complicated code written to mangle function bodies into shape. (I thinking Mocking.jl might actually have that code, randomly)