-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Feature/108 apply a measure selection strategy to all locations #111
Feature/108 apply a measure selection strategy to all locations #111
Conversation
…q operators in `PointSurroundings`
…atures across a dike traject based on default order
…e location matrix
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A few comments/questions
] | ||
self._location_matrix = strategy_input.locations_matrix | ||
self._structure_buffer = strategy_input.structure_buffer | ||
self._min_space_between_structures = strategy_input.min_space_between_structures |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not used?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Correct, this is preliminary work for #110
locations_profile_report_list: list[MultiLocationProfileCostReport] | ||
available_locations: list[PointSurroundings] | ||
|
||
def __init__( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How does this match with the design principle of parameterless init?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
_matrix[_reinforcement_per_location.location] = _suitable_locations + [ | ||
_reinforcement_per_location.selected_measure.output_name | ||
] | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Much better!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Will you add tests for the strategies?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, but once the code in OrderStrategy
is final, as we are already checking via other tests (in #112 ) whether the extra column with selected measure exists.
I'm also doubting whether to introduce already a protocol or wait until we have anotherstrategy case.
I also just realized I wrote order_stategy.py
instead of order_strategy.py
I will correct that in #110
No description provided.