-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 125
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
update to v5.18 #839
update to v5.18 #839
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #839 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 70.18% 70.18%
=======================================
Files 42 42
Lines 2727 2727
=======================================
Hits 1914 1914
Misses 813 813 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
@Tortar or @AayushSabharwal I am noticing some problems here with checkpointing the shelling example fails when it tries to checkpoint: https://github.com/JuliaDynamics/Agents.jl/actions/runs/5760638345/job/15616967230?pr=839#step:8:309 i am not sure if this is outdated documentation code, or a genuine bug we haven't written a test for. Can you please help? |
Meanwhile I have to take care of an error with a file path: https://github.com/JuliaDynamics/Agents.jl/actions/runs/5760638345/job/15616967230?pr=839#step:8:79 |
will take a look into it soon |
What about also removing the outdated comparison table from |
yes |
Hi! I'm more than happy to take a look, but I'm in the middle of moving and will probably only get time on Sunday. |
I'm also thinking that in relation to #841 we should only allow the user to create a new id for an agent with |
I thought about a better way to support all possible features we would like (and maybe more) in a better way in the
This is backward compatible, while much better, since it support every feature definable only inside structs (e.g. inner constructors) |
I would than wait for this revision for the 5.18 |
Actually, it is basically what @thevolatilebit described in issue #728 : https://github.com/Merck/AlgebraicAgents.jl/blob/8b7d05a462cd1ee8303fecbf77f01e7fa13b7d07/src/agent_macros.jl#L8 . We just need to allow also the old syntax not to break people code |
can you paste the usage code of the new version you propose? I can't imagine it / understand it. Just paste a piece of code that uses this new macro. |
mmmh giving more thought indeed it seems that it has not many advantages in addition to a better syntax for @agent AnotherAgentType [OptionalSupertype] struct YourAgentType{X}
extra_property::X
other_extra_property::Int
const immutable_property::X
# etc...
end |
well the only difference here is that we have We can make it non-breaking by naming the new macro |
I think using @agent AnotherAgentType struct YourAgentType{X} [<: OptionalSupertype]
extra_property::X
other_extra_property::Int
const immutable_property::X
# etc...
end |
i forgot i had otifications off for this repo. Okay, let's please re-calibrate ourselves. Is there any reason to introduce I guess we can add both and say in |
I totally agree with the transition phase, I think, apart from the better syntax, we get a more elusive benefit but I think anyway good for the future of the package: if more |
okay the discussion here has deviated dramatically from the original purpose (which was to fix the issue in the documentation builds in schelling that I cite above: #839 (comment) ) I would say, go ahead and impleemnt |
anyway I ran https://github.com/JuliaDynamics/Agents.jl/blob/main/examples/schelling.jl and there isn't any problem with checkpointing. I think the cause is outdated documentation |
I'm asking myself where |
I've spent some time on this, but Documenter provides no context for the error. I suspect it's something inside JLD2, since that's the only place I can find |
I solved this in #867 |
@Tortar can you please update this to current |
can we close this one given that we are going to 6.0? Probably we need to open an issue for the Schelling checkpoint problem with Documenter.jl |
No description provided.