Account for boarding restrictions when calculating direct transfers - #4421
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev-2.x #4421 +/- ##
=============================================
+ Coverage 58.09% 58.11% +0.01%
- Complexity 11070 11076 +6
=============================================
Files 1454 1454
Lines 58760 58771 +11
Branches 6771 6773 +2
=============================================
+ Hits 34138 34154 +16
+ Misses 22586 22579 -7
- Partials 2036 2038 +2
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
|
I think this is a good change and makes the results more correct. I'm inclined to say that this should be the default. Have you actually found a place in your data where this matters though? |
If a pattern is not boardable at the nearest stop then valid transfers at further stops would be dropped.
53bf4f2 to
1c9d5b9
Compare
|
I've updated the code to work with
Yes -- the purpose of the |
Summary
When calculating transfers between stops the list of transfers is pruned so that only the best option is kept for each pattern. In some cases it may be impossible to transfer to a pattern because the pruning doesn't take into account if a pattern may be boarded at the best stop, thereby removing worse stops where boarding would have been possible.
OTPFeature.ConsiderPatternsForDirectTransfersis added to allow disabling the pruning.Issue
#4040
Unit tests
Existing unit tests are extended.
Documentation
Configuration.mdis extended with the newOTPFeature:ConsiderPatternsForDirectTransfers.