Skip to content
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

Fix calculated/merged bus name #1148

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 12, 2020
Merged

Fix calculated/merged bus name #1148

merged 5 commits into from
Feb 12, 2020

Conversation

geofjamg
Copy link
Member

@geofjamg geofjamg commented Feb 7, 2020

Signed-off-by: Geoffroy Jamgotchian geoffroy.jamgotchian@rte-france.com

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements (please use '[x]' to check the checkboxes, or submit the PR and then click the checkboxes)

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
  • Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)

Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem ? If so, link to this issue using '#XXX' and skip the rest
No

What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
Bug fix

What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
Calculated buses in node/breaker view and merged buses in bus/breaker view are not named correctly. Calculated/merged bus name is based on voltage level id like their ids but are not based on voltage level name.

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
If voltage level name exists, calculated/merged bus name is derived from it. If voltage level name does not exist, name is set to null.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API? If yes, check the following:

  • The Breaking Change or Deprecated label has been added
  • The migration guide has been updated in the github wiki (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)

Other information:

(if any of the questions/checkboxes don't apply, please delete them entirely)

Signed-off-by: Geoffroy Jamgotchian <geoffroy.jamgotchian@rte-france.com>
@@ -254,7 +254,8 @@ private void updateCache() {
}, encountered);
if (isBusValid(busSet)) {
String mergedBusId = BusBreakerVoltageLevel.this.id + "_" + busNum++;
MergedBus mergedBus = new MergedBus(mergedBusId, busSet);
String mergedBusName = BusBreakerVoltageLevel.this.name != null ? BusBreakerVoltageLevel.this.name + "_" + busNum++ : null;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems you increment the busNum twice: the first time to generate the busId, the second time for the busName.
I think you should use busNum without increment there.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed!

Signed-off-by: Geoffroy Jamgotchian <geoffroy.jamgotchian@rte-france.com>
Signed-off-by: Geoffroy Jamgotchian <geoffroy.jamgotchian@rte-france.com>
@sonarcloud
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Feb 12, 2020

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities (and Security Hotspot 0 Security Hotspots to review)
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

100.0% 100.0% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants