Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add exactly1 option for disjunctions and fix bugs #90

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Oct 28, 2023

Conversation

pulsipher
Copy link
Collaborator

@pulsipher pulsipher commented Oct 26, 2023

Closes #72. Some minor bug fixes and changes that came up include:

  • Have deletion methods for disjunctions and disjunct constraints remove all their mappings
  • Remove unnecessary GDPData(args...) method
  • Include the macro docstrings in the docs
  • Moving reformulation specific methods
  • Fixing the reformulation methods for exactly constraints to better handle assumptions on function type (more work is needed)
  • Improved error messaging for incorrect keyword arguments to @disjunction
  • Fixed some test functions to use @test on the first call of a method/macro to be tested which leads to more helpful error messages when it doesn't work (more work is needed to do this with all tests)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 26, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (3af182e) 98.91% compared to head (50cdc2a) 98.84%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #90      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.91%   98.84%   -0.07%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines         921      952      +31     
==========================================
+ Hits          911      941      +30     
- Misses         10       11       +1     
Files Coverage Δ
src/bigm.jl 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/constraints.jl 98.83% <100.00%> (+0.19%) ⬆️
src/datatypes.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/hull.jl 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/logic.jl 99.25% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
src/macros.jl 96.89% <ø> (+0.77%) ⬆️
src/reformulate.jl 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/model.jl 93.33% <33.33%> (-6.67%) ⬇️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@hdavid16
Copy link
Owner

I think we should use a different name for this keyword argument since it is not exactly 1 for Nested disjunctions.

@pulsipher
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I think we should use a different name for this keyword argument since it is not exactly 1 for Nested disjunctions.

Any suggestions?

@pulsipher pulsipher requested a review from hdavid16 October 27, 2023 14:34
@pulsipher pulsipher changed the title Enable exactly1 option and fix bugs Add exclusive option to disjunctions and fix bugs Oct 27, 2023
@pulsipher pulsipher changed the title Add exclusive option to disjunctions and fix bugs Add exclusive option for disjunctions and fix bugs Oct 27, 2023
@hdavid16 hdavid16 merged commit 04334c9 into hdavid16:master Oct 28, 2023
4 of 6 checks passed
@pulsipher pulsipher changed the title Add exclusive option for disjunctions and fix bugs Add exactly1 option for disjunctions and fix bugs Nov 27, 2023
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.

Have @disjunction automatically add exactly one constraints with a keyword argument
2 participants