Realign 'count' increment

[julian-evers]

Description

Increment 'count' adjacent to the 'dt' change to avoid an off-by-one error of 'max_count'.

Fixes #2964

Type of change

Please add a line in the relevant section of CHANGELOG.md to document the change (include PR #) - note reverse order of PR #s. If necessary, also add to the list of breaking changes.

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Optimization (back-end change that speeds up the code)
• [ x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Key checklist:

• [ x] No style issues: $ pre-commit run (see CONTRIBUTING.md for how to set this up to run automatically when committing locally, in just two lines of code)
• [ x] All tests pass: $ python run-tests.py --all
• [x ] The documentation builds: $ python run-tests.py --doctest

You can run unit and doctests together at once, using $ python run-tests.py --quick.

Further checks:

• Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and no project coverage change.

Comparison is base (9d60f05) 99.71% compared to head (4645b66) 99.71%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2986    +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage    99.71%   99.71%            
=========================================
  Files          273      245    -28     
  Lines        19032    18705   -327     
=========================================
- Hits         18977    18651   -326     
+ Misses          55       54     -1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pybamm/solvers/casadi_solver.py	99.66% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 33 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[rtimms]

thanks, looks good! the failing notebook (examples/notebooks/parameterization/parameter-values.ipynb) looks unrelated to your changes - does it run locally for you?

[rtimms]

would just doing count > self.max_step_decrease_count be simpler to read?

[julian-evers]

Just doing count > self.max_step_decrease_count would be simpler to read, I have changed it.
The "parameter-values" notebook runs locally for me, but I noticed that there was a different value assigned for a parameter (b) in the markdown cell than in the code cell of the "Solving a model" section and assigned it to the value of the code cell.

[brosaplanella]

thanks, looks good! the failing notebook (examples/notebooks/parameterization/parameter-values.ipynb) looks unrelated to your changes - does it run locally for you?

The example fails because in one of the lines it uses a parameter_values dict that does not have all the required values (unrelated to the changes here). @julian-evers , it should be an easy fix if you want to address that in this PR.

[rtimms]

The failing notebook is unrelated to this PR and will be fixed as part of #2957

[review-notebook-app]

Check out this pull request on 

See visual diffs & provide feedback on Jupyter Notebooks.

---

Powered by ReviewNB

[rtimms]

thanks @julian-evers looks good!

[rtimms]

@all-contributors please add @julian-evers for code

[allcontributors]

@rtimms

I've put up a pull request to add @julian-evers! 🎉