-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 94
[breaking] remove automatic_copy_to #1512
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
Conversation
docs could be a bit more direct:
|
:default_copy_to, | ||
) | ||
return default_copy_to(dest, src, true) | ||
end |
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.
It seems crazy, but this has been sitting here since MOI 0.2.0! 1ae8661
filter_constraints::Union{Nothing,Function} = nothing, | ||
) | ||
if !MOI.supports_incremental_interface(dest, copy_names) | ||
error( |
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.
I'm wondering whether it makes sense to remove this error.
MOI.supports_incremental_interface
is what is used by instantiate
.
Would there be a case where you want instantiate to add a cache but you would still like to be able to call default_copy_to?
Removing the error is nonbreaking so it might be fine for now
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.
This check is trivial and will be in-lined. It also prevents a later error like "add variable not allowed" in some cases. I'd suggest we leave it in, at least until all the solvers are updated. We could remove it for 1.0 if it's not needed.
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.
This check is trivial and will be in-lined
Yes, I was not worried about peformance
I'd suggest we leave it in, at least until all the solvers are updated. We could remove it for 1.0 if it's not needed.
Sounds good
Closes #1503