-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
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
Issue 334 - local inputs connected to promoted variables #341
Conversation
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.
That works Ok, thanks.
A remark on the order of commits: it is better to implement the test, then the fix. It makes easier for the reviewer to checkout the commit with the test, see that it fails, then checkout the head of the branch and see that the test passes.
Even if you did not work in this order (though it is generally advised to do so), an interactive rebase allows to put your commit history in the right order.
I just ask for a change in a comment and it will be Ok.
Thanks for you comments. Can we integrate this PR in #340? |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #341 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 91.09% 91.11% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 191 191
Lines 7648 7655 +7
Branches 726 730 +4
==========================================
+ Hits 6967 6975 +8
+ Misses 546 542 -4
- Partials 135 138 +3
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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 changes.
Sorry, in the previous review, I missed you commented out some code (that, indeed, should legitimately be removed).
The change has been integrated in #340. |
This PR fixes #334 (partly solved by #332) where some variables are tagged as inputs instead of outputs when using
VariableList.from_problem()
.To fix this,
VariableList.from_problem()
was modified to handle the effect of usingconnect()
with local inputs and promoted outputs. This behaviour can be observed when usinglist_variables()
or thevariable_viewer()
.However,
generate_inputs()
works fine and gives the correct input list because it uses_utils.get_unconnected_input_names()
. This brings up the fact thatVariableList.from_problem()
is too complicated for what we really need it to do and should deserve a rework in a later PR.