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

Made compatible with last bioptim version #3

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Nov 9, 2021
Merged

Conversation

fbailly
Copy link
Contributor

@fbailly fbailly commented May 6, 2021

Should be merged in a branch called something like "bioptim_updated"

@fbailly fbailly changed the title Made compatible with last bioptim version [WIP] Made compatible with last bioptim version May 6, 2021
@fbailly
Copy link
Contributor Author

fbailly commented May 7, 2021

@pariterre Pariterre, you can merge in a branch with a tag refering to the updated version of Bioptim. But before, please go through my PR in Bioptim, because I had to make a necessary changes in custom penalty.

@fbailly
Copy link
Contributor Author

fbailly commented May 8, 2021

@fbailly fbailly changed the title [WIP] Made compatible with last bioptim version Made compatible with last bioptim version May 8, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@pariterre pariterre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • two minor comments
    AND
  • Should we update the MHE example so it fits the new API? @aceglia you may take this opportunity to familiarize yourself with the bioptim MHE API?

Comment on lines +174 to +175
self.constraints.add(maximal_tau, phase=i, node=Node.ALL, minimal_tau=self.tau_min,
get_all_nodes_at_once=True)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we black?

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ def generate_table(out):

# IPOPT
ocp = prepare_ocp(biorbd_model_path=model_path)
opts = {"linear_solver": "ma57"}
opts = {"linear_solver": "ma57", "print_level": 0}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ma57 and print_level=0 gives highly misleading error message. I fear this will lead to think that the examples are broken (instead of their installation is wrong...)

@pariterre pariterre merged commit bb3cf20 into s2mLab:main Nov 9, 2021
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.

2 participants