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

Bump dependency versions #15

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Oct 21, 2024
Merged

Bump dependency versions #15

merged 8 commits into from
Oct 21, 2024

Conversation

Zetison
Copy link
Collaborator

@Zetison Zetison commented Oct 21, 2024

Bumped versions to be compatible with TimeStruct v0.9 and EnergyModelsBase v0.8.1. Also adjusted the topology legend and title to always be visible. Removed redundant compatibility requirements for tests.

@Zetison Zetison added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 21, 2024
@Zetison Zetison requested a review from JulStraus October 21, 2024 05:40
@Zetison Zetison self-assigned this Oct 21, 2024
Copy link
Member

@JulStraus JulStraus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Generally speaking ok. Seems like not too many changes. I would however highly suggest to limit the compatibility to the required values to avoid any confusions.

examples/case7.jl Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -219,14 +219,14 @@ function get_periods(T::TS.TimeStructure, type::Type, sp::Int64, rp::Int64, sc::
if eltype(T.operational[sp].rep_periods) <: TS.OperationalScenarios
return [
t for
t ∈ T if t.sp == sp && t.period.rp == rp && t.period.period.sc == sc
t ∈ T if t.sp == sp && t.period.rp == rp && t.period.period.osc == sc
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have to try to find a different design here. Although I am quite certain we are in TimeStruct now at a state that we do no longer change it, it is still problematic to go directly for the individual fields. This is relevant for all methods for the function get_periods().

On a side note, do we still need get_periods(T::TS.TimeStructure, type::Type). It is at least not called within results_axis_utils.jl

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I considered using internal functions in TimeStruct for this, but I guess that is also problematic?

get_periods(T::TS.TimeStructure, type::Type) is called in src/utils_GUI/GUI_utils.jl.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, it is equally problematic. There are other approaches how we can handle that using the Parametric input type. We can revisit it later.

Project.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@JulStraus JulStraus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Once the tests have run, you can merge it.

@Zetison Zetison merged commit a296aff into main Oct 21, 2024
3 checks passed
@Zetison Zetison deleted the enhanc/bump_dependency_versions branch October 21, 2024 11:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants