Input checking for MarkovConsumerType

[dclow]

MarkovConsumerType could use more checking of its inputs. It can give very weird error messages if it receives inputs that are just slightly different than what they should be.

For example, I wasted a lot of time with an infinite horizon version before I figured out that PermGroFac and LivPrb should be lists (of length 1, whose only element is a np.array), but Rfree should just be a numpy array. Also, those arrays should be of shape (N,), where N is the number of Markov states. Using an array of shape (N,1) also produced a very obscure error message

I imagine putting in checks at the beginning to verify that inputs are the right types and shapes could save a lot of people some of the hassle I went through

[mnwhite]

That's because LivPrb and PermGroFac are time-varying, so they need to be
lists at the top level (before being input to the solver for one period).

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:46 PM, dclow notifications@github.com wrote:

MarkovConsumerType could use more checking of its inputs. It can get very
weird error message if it receives inputs that are just slightly different
than what they should be.

For example, I wasted a lot of time with an infinite horizon version
before I figured out that PermGroFac and LivPrb should be lists (of length
1, whose only element is a np.array), but Rfree should just be a numpy
array. Also, those arrays should be of shape (N,), where N is the number of
Markov states. Using an array of shape (N,1) also produced a very obscure
error message

I imagine putting in checks at the beginning to verify that inputs are the
right types and shapes could save a lot of people some of the hassle I went
through

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#83, or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANUQFbeQcVNLEg3EyNOnSgK0ZNL147dSks5qubj2gaJpZM4KIThx
.

[dclow]

Just issued a PR to do this. If the PR gets merged (maybe after dealing with issues you find), we can close this issue.

[mnwhite]

I will tackle these PRs this weekend. I also plan to prepare a rather
large PR with the new simulation regime.

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 3:11 PM, dclow notifications@github.com wrote:

Just issued a PR to do this. If the PR gets merged (maybe after dealing
with issues you find), we can close this issue.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#83 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ANUQFSJ_HyXVscZeFcOtQxHeLLKvU2Oxks5qzTDWgaJpZM4KIThx
.

[mnwhite]

The PR that addressed this was merged back in October; closing.