Parth

> Yes, but I think we can just add a line there directing to a more elaborate list of what can be differentiated? Yes, this sounds like a good idea.

> Can you add several examples for this? Yes, I have added a few examples in the description.

@vgvassilev Should I add clad benchmarking for switch statement with this PR?

Sorry for the late reply. `getDefinition` will likely not help here, since we are already using `getDefinition` in [`DerivativeBuilder::Derive`](https://github.com/vgvassilev/clad/blob/031db32ce4a03f15b0621618187a4411b5340be3/lib/Differentiator/DerivativeBuilder.cpp#L113) before differentiating functions. The cause of the problem seems to be...

Ideally, how should functions containing pointer parameters should be differentiated ? And differentiating this function in forward mode is giving error too ``` double f5(double* p) { double* another_ptr =...

Thank you for your detailed reply, I understand the situation much better now. I am having one more doubt, unrelated to this discussion but I am not sure where to...

@vgvassilev @grimmmyshini I am playing with the clad codebase from last couple of days to understand it better, I am also studying about clang plugins and clang AST, hoping understanding...

The work in this PR was rebased on top of master and merged as part of #601

We later decided to go with a different design for modelling derivative types. Therefore, the work in this pull request is not required anymore.

> hi @parth-07 for c == 2 condition du and dv will be 15 and 9 right ? cause the loop will run 3 times. Oh, yes. You are right.