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

Add a new enum value for sensitivity function (bus reactive power) #2930

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 15, 2024

Conversation

vidaldid-rte
Copy link
Contributor

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • 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)

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Extend the sensitivity API by adding a new enum in SensitivityFunctionType, BUS_REACTIVE_POWER
It can be used to request the sensitivity of the total reactive injection at a bus, for example to a change in a targetV in the network.

What is the current behavior?

DQInj/DtargetV cannot be implemented at this time because the enum is missing.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?

  • Yes -> switch statements on SensitivityFunctionType that don't have a default case will no longer compile.
  • No

If yes, please check if the following requirements are fulfilled

  • The Breaking Change or Deprecated label has been added
  • [ X] The migration steps are described in the following section

What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR? (migration steps)

Developers using the SensitivityFunctionType in switch statement should either add a case for the new value or a default case.

Signed-off-by: VIDAL Didier (Externe) <didier.vidal_externe@rte-france.com>
Copy link

sonarcloud bot commented Mar 15, 2024

@annetill annetill merged commit 148dd38 into main Mar 15, 2024
6 checks passed
@annetill annetill deleted the new_sensi_enum branch March 15, 2024 08:34
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.

4 participants