Reject non-real wrapped Laplace rate parameters

[FlorianPfaff]

Summary

• reject boolean and complex lambda_ / kappa_ inputs in WrappedLaplaceDistribution
• normalize conversion failures to a parameter-specific ValueError
• preserve accepted Python and backend real scalar forms, including one-element arrays
• add focused regression coverage for both constructor parameters

Root cause

_validate_positive_scalar() converted inputs with the active backend and then checked only shape, finiteness, and value > 0. NumPy considers some complex values greater than zero (for example, np.asarray(1 + 1j) > 0 is true), and booleans also satisfy the positive-value check. The constructor could therefore accept non-real rate parameters and produce a complex-valued distribution even though lambda_ and kappa_ are documented as positive rates.

Fix

Inspect the backend value through to_numpy() before the arithmetic checks and require a real integer, unsigned-integer, or floating dtype. Complex, boolean, textual, temporal, and other non-real values now fail with a descriptive ValueError. Existing finite and positivity validation remains unchanged.

Validation

• reproduced the pre-fix acceptance of True, 1 + 1j, and one-element complex arrays
• verified the patched dtype guard rejects those inputs while retaining real Python scalars and one-element real arrays
• python -m py_compile passes for the modified module and new regression test
• branch comparison: two commits ahead, zero behind; only the wrapped-Laplace validator and focused regression are changed

The full backend matrix is delegated to GitHub Actions.

[github-actions]

✅MegaLinter analysis: Success

Descriptor	Linter	Files	Fixed	Errors	Warnings	Elapsed time
✅ COPYPASTE	jscpd	yes		no	no	22.47s
✅ JSON	prettier	7	0	0	0	1.06s
✅ JSON	v8r	7		0	0	3.11s
✅ MARKDOWN	markdownlint	68	0	0	0	1.82s
✅ MARKDOWN	markdown-table-formatter	68	0	0	0	0.67s
✅ PYTHON	black	1490	182	0	0	87.7s
✅ PYTHON	isort	1490	328	0	0	2.52s
✅ REPOSITORY	betterleaks	yes		no	no	2.44s
✅ REPOSITORY	checkov	yes		no	no	52.92s
✅ REPOSITORY	gitleaks	yes		no	no	14.19s
✅ REPOSITORY	git_diff	yes		no	no	0.28s
✅ REPOSITORY	secretlint	yes		no	no	59.64s
✅ REPOSITORY	syft	yes		no	no	5.42s
✅ REPOSITORY	trivy-sbom	yes		no	no	6.61s
✅ REPOSITORY	trufflehog	yes		no	no	31.32s
✅ YAML	prettier	11	0	0	0	0.76s
✅ YAML	v8r	11		0	0	11.17s
✅ YAML	yamllint	11		0	0	0.6s

Notices

📣 MegaLinter 9.5.0 is out! Discover the new features and security recommendations in the release announcement. (Skip this info by defining SECURITY_SUGGESTIONS: false)

See detailed reports in MegaLinter artifacts

Your project could benefit from a custom flavor, which would allow you to run only the linters you need, and thus improve runtime performances. (Skip this info by defining FLAVOR_SUGGESTIONS: false)

• Documentation: Custom Flavors
• Command: npx mega-linter-runner@9.6.0 --custom-flavor-setup --custom-flavor-linters PYTHON_BLACK,PYTHON_ISORT,COPYPASTE_JSCPD,JSON_V8R,JSON_PRETTIER,MARKDOWN_MARKDOWNLINT,MARKDOWN_MARKDOWN_TABLE_FORMATTER,REPOSITORY_CHECKOV,REPOSITORY_GIT_DIFF,REPOSITORY_GITLEAKS,REPOSITORY_BETTERLEAKS,REPOSITORY_SECRETLINT,REPOSITORY_SYFT,REPOSITORY_TRIVY_SBOM,REPOSITORY_TRUFFLEHOG,YAML_PRETTIER,YAML_YAMLLINT,YAML_V8R

Show us your support by starring ⭐ the repository