-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
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
New parameter to use tighter storage formulation #641
New parameter to use tighter storage formulation #641
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #641 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 15 15
Lines 671 671
=========================================
Hits 671 671 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the PR. I've made a suggestion to use Union{Missing,Symbol}
. This means using missing
instead of none
.
Co-authored-by: Abel Soares Siqueira <nepper271@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Pull request details
Describe the changes made in this pull request
New parameter
use_binary_storage_method
in the inputs files and schema of the modelList of related issues or pull requests
Closes #638
Collaboration confirmation
As a contributor I confirm