Issues with WellModel [BUG]

[rubencalje]

Describe the bug
There are three issues with the wellModel:

1 strange info message
When running the notebook http://localhost:8888/notebooks/pastas/doc/examples/multiple_wells.ipynb
During ml_wm.solve() I get the following info message:
INFO: No distance passed to HantushWellModel, assuming r=1.0.

2 sorting error, when distances are not sorted yet, this results in a key-errror:
KeyError: 'Extraction_2'

3 stacklegend in stacked_results gives the following error:
UnboundLocalError: local variable 'loc' referenced before assignment

To Reproduce
1 Run the notebook in http://localhost:8888/notebooks/pastas/doc/examples/multiple_wells.ipynb
2 In the above notebook, change line
w = ps.WellModel(list(extraction_ts.values()), "Wells", distances) in:
w = ps.WellModel(list(extraction_ts.values()), "Wells", distances[::-1])
3 In the above notebook, run:
ml_wm.plots.stacked_results(figsize=(10, 8), stacklegend=True);

Expected behavior
1 No info message
2 No error
3 No error

Python package version
Python version: 3.9.7
NumPy version: 1.23.5
Pandas version: 1.5.3
SciPy version: 1.9.1
Matplotlib version: 3.7.1
Numba version: 0.56.4
LMfit version: 1.2.1
Latexify version: Not Installed
Pastas version: 1.1.0

[dbrakenhoff]

I'll take a look.

1. The first issue is quite challenging to deal with, as discussed in How to resolve "INFO: No distance passed to HantushWellModel, assuming r=1.0." #437 and No distance passed to HantushWellModel, assuming r=1.0. #601. Whenever a call is made to ml.get_parameters(name), no distances are provided to WellModel, and it uses r=1.0. I don't think there is a clean way to distinguish between an internal call to rfunc.step and an external one without adding loads of if/else's internally. Implementing an argument to silence the warning then results in lots of unnecessary warn=False being passed around just to get rid of this message. But maybe someone has a better idea?

2 and 3 are simple fixes I will commit soon.

[raoulcollenteur]

@dbrakenhoff and @rubencalje is this issue fixed after merging #603 and #604 ?

[dbrakenhoff]

Yep, all fixed!