Cleanup Interface/Event runLog.header

[albeanth]

Description

Prior to this PR, the Operator would print out the wrong information for tightly coupled calculations. Rather then print the current iteration number, the operator would print "cycle" before printing the iteration number.

E.g., within cycle 0 time node 0, the following would get printed to the stdout.

===========  Triggering EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 ===========
=========== 02 - fissionProducts                EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 ===========
=========== 03 - xsGroups                       EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 ===========
...
===========  Triggering Coupled - cycle 0 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           Coupled - cycle 0 ===========
=========== 02 - fissionProducts                Coupled - cycle 0 ===========
=========== 03 - xsGroups                       Coupled - cycle 0 ===========
... 
===========  Triggering Coupled - cycle 1 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           Coupled - cycle 1 ===========
=========== 02 - fissionProducts                Coupled - cycle 1 ===========
=========== 03 - xsGroups                       Coupled - cycle 1 ===========

This should rather read the following.

===========  Triggering EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 ===========
...
===========  Triggering Coupled - iteration 0 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           Coupled - iteration 0 ===========
...
===========  Triggering Coupled - iteration 1 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           Coupled - iteration 1 ===========

Unit tests were also added to ensure that the correct string within Operator::expandCycleAndTimeNodeArgs gets printed for each event type and interface.

---

Checklist

• This PR has only one purpose or idea.
• Tests have been added/updated to verify that the new/changed code works.

• The code style follows good practices.
• The commit message(s) follow good practices.

• The release notes (location doc/release/0.X.rst) are up-to-date with any bug fixes or new features.
• The documentation is still up-to-date in the doc folder.
• The dependencies are still up-to-date in setup.py.

[albeanth]

@jakehader @onufer Just an FYI.

[keckler]

I am a big fan, and would be an even bigger fan if it were even more descriptive, like:

===========  Triggering EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           EveryNode - cycle 0, node 0 ===========
...
===========  Triggering Coupled - iteration 0 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           Coupled - cycle 0, node 0, iteration 0 ===========
...
===========  Triggering Coupled - iteration 1 Event ===========
=========== 01 - main                           Coupled - cycle 0, node 0, iteration 1 ===========

I really hate having to scroll around to know where in the calculation the printout is referring.

[albeanth]

@keckler great idea! I originally had something like this in a git stash and had in my head that it would require a bigger API change. Turns out it didn't. And ended up resulting in a way less intrusive change! So double score.
d0d93e9

Running one of our in-house tests now to make sure the stdout is right.

[albeanth]

@keckler great idea! I originally had something like this in a git stash and had in my head that it would require a bigger API change. Turns out it didn't. And ended up resulting in a way less intrusive change! So double score. d0d93e9

Running one of our in-house tests now to make sure the stdout is right.

Jk. The in-house test just failed because the bigger API change is in fact needed. I would suggest that we revert back to fcfbcf9 then address your suggestions post our big internal deliverable. This will require a change to the interactCoupled method on all of the interfaces. Less than ideal right now I think....

Thoughts?

[keckler]

No big deal, happy for this small change anyway.

[opotowsky]

💯 Great description, tests are awesome, winning PR! 🏆