Skip to content

Reject non-real wrapped Laplace parameters#4394

Closed
FlorianPfaff wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
agent/validate-wrapped-laplace-parameters-20260714
Closed

Reject non-real wrapped Laplace parameters#4394
FlorianPfaff wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
agent/validate-wrapped-laplace-parameters-20260714

Conversation

@FlorianPfaff

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • reject boolean, text, and complex values for WrappedLaplaceDistribution rate parameters
  • preserve positive finite real scalar and length-one array inputs
  • add focused regression coverage for both lambda_ and kappa_

Bug

_validate_positive_scalar() converted its input to a backend array and then only checked finiteness and positivity. Boolean values such as True therefore passed as the rate 1, while text and complex values could either leak backend-specific exceptions or be accepted despite not being real-valued distribution parameters.

Fix

Extract the scalar value after shape validation, require a non-boolean numbers.Real, and normalize backend conversion/comparison failures to a clear ValueError naming the invalid parameter.

Validation

  • python -m py_compile /tmp/wrapped_laplace_distribution_patched.py /tmp/test_wrapped_laplace_parameter_validation.py
  • python -m pytest -q /tmp/test_wrapped_laplace_parameter_validation.py (1 passed, 8 subtests passed)

Full repository CI should validate the change across the configured backend matrix.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

MegaLinter analysis: Success

Descriptor Linter Files Fixed Errors Warnings Elapsed time
✅ COPYPASTE jscpd yes no no 23.3s
✅ JSON prettier 7 0 0 0 1.09s
✅ JSON v8r 7 0 0 3.58s
✅ MARKDOWN markdownlint 68 0 0 0 2.21s
✅ MARKDOWN markdown-table-formatter 68 0 0 0 0.64s
✅ PYTHON black 1490 182 0 0 95.62s
✅ PYTHON isort 1490 327 0 0 2.59s
✅ REPOSITORY betterleaks yes no no 2.54s
✅ REPOSITORY checkov yes no no 57.03s
✅ REPOSITORY gitleaks yes no no 15.12s
✅ REPOSITORY git_diff yes no no 0.24s
✅ REPOSITORY secretlint yes no no 60.94s
✅ REPOSITORY syft yes no no 6.77s
✅ REPOSITORY trivy-sbom yes no no 5.92s
✅ REPOSITORY trufflehog yes no no 31.83s
✅ YAML prettier 11 0 0 0 0.64s
✅ YAML v8r 11 0 0 12.96s
✅ YAML yamllint 11 0 0 0.77s

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

MegaLinter is graciously provided by OX Security
Show us your support by starring ⭐ the repository

@FlorianPfaff FlorianPfaff marked this pull request as ready for review July 14, 2026 20:10
@FlorianPfaff FlorianPfaff enabled auto-merge (squash) July 14, 2026 20:10
auto-merge was automatically disabled July 15, 2026 05:04

Pull request was closed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant