Issue 1182 verbose outputs and tagging PyBaMM citations

[agriyakhetarpal]

Description

Adds a caller method for citations.py to tag PyBaMM citations to their use of particular models or solvers and adds verbose output while printing citations

Fixes #1182

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)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Key checklist:

• 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)
• All tests pass: $ python run-tests.py --all
• 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

[agriyakhetarpal]

@rtimms this implementation differs from what I had thought about doing initially with a metaclass and @register_citation, but it does seem to work as intended – now that I see it, @brosaplanella's idea of adding a table for even simpler output (#1182 (comment)) can be done too (though probably in a different PR?)

Note: tests fail due to CasADi, will merge develop after they pass

[valentinsulzer]

Looks good to me, thanks @agriyakhetarpal !

[agriyakhetarpal]

Ready to merge once tests pass

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and no project coverage change.

Comparison is base (c714f59) 99.69% compared to head (a460035) 99.69%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2862   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    99.69%   99.69%           
========================================
  Files          273      273           
  Lines        19071    19083   +12     
========================================
+ Hits         19012    19024   +12     
  Misses          59       59           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pybamm/citations.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

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

[valentinsulzer]

why did you skip ci?

[agriyakhetarpal]

In the last commit I only added comments to improve coverage, I did not know that skipping CI this way would not run the coverage workflow

[agriyakhetarpal]

I'll do a force push to re-run them if that would be okay

[valentinsulzer]

Yeah you have to run all the tests to get CI, it's usually worth doing anyway unless you really did only add extra tests. Still need to fix one line of coverage

[agriyakhetarpal]

Thanks, I fixed the coverage – tag_citations() is available as a standalone method as of now but can be set to private later since it is wrapped within the current print methods too.

Though I don't know how to fix no-method-argument (E0211) on Codacy, because changing it from _caller_name() to _caller_name(self) will not run it on the same code object included in the outer frame but execute it on itself, which breaks the intended functionality with inspect.stack (I tested on ipython and I was having issues, it was not tagging the correct class). Otherwise this should be fine to merge now

[rtimms]

thanks @agriyakhetarpal ! I'm happy to merge even if codacy isn't happy. looks like failing test is random and will be fixed by #2844