Added cost details to sol

[EveCharbie]

This change is 

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #440 (47a4293) into master (c3cc7d7) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 80.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #440   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   80.47%   80.48%           
=======================================
  Files          85       85           
  Lines        8985     8996   +11     
=======================================
+ Hits         7231     7240    +9     
- Misses       1754     1756    +2     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
bioptim/examples/getting_started/pendulum.py	71.42% <0.00%> (-2.65%)	⬇️
bioptim/optimization/solution.py	84.80% <92.30%> (+0.09%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c3cc7d7...47a4293. Read the comment docs.

[pariterre]

I don't understand the purpose of "to_console"? What happens if you put False, doesn't it just print nothing (which kind of doesn't make sense)?

[EveCharbie]

Yes, if to_console=False, nothing is print to the console but the values are added to sol. This might be great if you are multi-starting and want to log the console or if you want to be able to follow what is happening in the console with a print_level very low. However, I would understand if you prefer to remove this option.

[pariterre]

As verbally discussed:
Please create a separate function as it is not intended that printing modifies anything internally. If you think your function shares things with this one, it makes sense to create subfunctions that can be called by both of them!

[pariterre]

See previous comment

[EveCharbie]

I'm on black version :
black 22.1.0 pyhd8ed1ab_0 conda-forge
And no file would have been changed on my computer :/

[pariterre]

Reviewed 3 of 3 files at r2, 5 of 5 files at r3, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @EveCharbie)

---

README.md, line 356 at r3 (raw file):

```python
sol.print_cost()  # For printing their values in the console
sol.detailed_cost_values_to_sol()  # For adding the objectives details to sol for later manipulations

sol.compute_detailed_cost_values() (to sol is redundant)

---

tests/test_global_getting_started.py, line 74 at r3 (raw file):

        # detailed cost values
        sol.detailed_cost_values_to_sol()
        np.testing.assert_almost_equal(sol.detailed_cost[0]['cost_value_weighted'], 41.57063948309302)

Maybe to help for future, instead of hard coding the value, you can compare it to f[0, 0] that is already valided? Like that if it ever change, we won't have to update the 2 lines for each test that changed?

[pariterre]

I like what you have done so far, I think it is a great addition :)

[EveCharbie]

@pariterre are we good with this?

[pariterre]

This commit 27eeac3
removed the folder "external" it is not possible anymore to use ACADOS. Please revert to the previous commit and recommit your last commit (I can help if you are affraid of losing work)

[EveCharbie]

I'm so sorry it happened again!
Is it ok now?

[pariterre]

@EveCharbie
Unfortunately Submodules can't only be "revert", you have to checkout to the previous commit, then recommit the stuff you need to keep. Please note, that this process CAN lose work. I am availble if need to make sure you don't loose work ;)

[pariterre]

Reviewed 3 of 7 files at r4, 3 of 7 files at r6, 4 of 4 files at r7, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @EveCharbie)

[pariterre]

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r8, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @EveCharbie)