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

CompatHelper: bump compat for SolverCore to 0.3, (keep existing compat) #222

Merged

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request changes the compat entry for the SolverCore package from ~0.1,~0.2 to ~0.1,~0.2, 0.3.
This keeps the compat entries for earlier versions.

Note: I have not tested your package with this new compat entry.
It is your responsibility to make sure that your package tests pass before you merge this pull request.

@sshin23 sshin23 force-pushed the compathelper/new_version/2022-09-10-00-37-00-337-04281866383 branch from 5810906 to 773f330 Compare September 10, 2022 00:37
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Sep 10, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #222 (0ddd232) into master (be4f87e) will increase coverage by 1.35%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

❗ Current head 0ddd232 differs from pull request most recent head fbde336. Consider uploading reports for the commit fbde336 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #222      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.31%   75.67%   +1.35%     
==========================================
  Files          38       38              
  Lines        3703     3453     -250     
==========================================
- Hits         2752     2613     -139     
+ Misses        951      840     -111     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/MadNLP.jl 0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/IPM/solver.jl 92.03% <100.00%> (+0.64%) ⬆️
src/IPM/utils.jl 93.75% <100.00%> (+0.27%) ⬆️
src/LinearSolvers/linearsolvers.jl 0.00% <0.00%> (-20.00%) ⬇️
src/Interfaces/utils.jl 66.03% <0.00%> (-2.69%) ⬇️
src/utils.jl 83.78% <0.00%> (-1.94%) ⬇️
src/Interfaces/MOI_interface.jl 70.55% <0.00%> (-1.74%) ⬇️
src/options.jl 96.42% <0.00%> (-0.24%) ⬇️
src/KKT/KKTsystem.jl 97.14% <0.00%> (-0.23%) ⬇️
... and 19 more

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@sshin23 sshin23 requested a review from frapac October 21, 2022 04:33
Copy link
Collaborator

@frapac frapac left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me!

I should think about this, but I am wondering if MadNLPExecutionStats should be an attribute in MadNLPSolver. It just stores duplicate information, and we are using it only to return the solution of a particular optimization problem. The question is: what difference it would make if instead we create MadNLPExecutionStats only when the solver has converged (and define it as an immutable struct)?

src/IPM/solver.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/IPM/utils.jl Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@sshin23
Copy link
Member

sshin23 commented Oct 24, 2022

@frapac thanks for the review! For the execution stats, we're following the JSO's convention, which considers ExecutionStats as a return value https://github.com/JuliaSmoothOptimizers/SolverCore.jl/blob/main/src/solver.jl#L38-L48 We want to have ExecutionStats even if we're not converged because in that case the exit status still provides useful information.

@sshin23 sshin23 merged commit 6c22169 into master Oct 24, 2022
@frapac frapac deleted the compathelper/new_version/2022-09-10-00-37-00-337-04281866383 branch April 10, 2024 12:24
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.

3 participants