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

Enforce Network Keyword Consistency #3885

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 31, 2024

Conversation

bska
Copy link
Member

@bska bska commented Jan 31, 2024

The standard network model (GRUPNET) prohibits any extended network model keywords and vice versa. Similarly, the *PROP keywords require the NETWORK keyword, and the NODEPROP keyword also requires the BRANPROP keyword.

The standard network model (GRUPNET) prohibits any extended network
model keywords and vice versa.  Similarly, the *PROP keywords
require the 'NETWORK' keyword, and the NODEPROP keyword also
requires the 'BRANPROP' keyword.
@bska
Copy link
Member Author

bska commented Jan 31, 2024

jenkins build this please

Copy link
Member

@atgeirr atgeirr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice, should be merged.

@@ -68,6 +75,10 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(Branch) {

BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(INVALID_DOWNTREE_NODE) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am not sure what this and the next was supposed to test, but after the change won't both just throw due to both NETWORK and GRUPNET?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

but after the change won't both just throw due to both NETWORK and GRUPNET?

I don't see GRUPNET here. There is GRUPTREE but no GRUPNET as far as I can tell.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

My mistake, thanks for pointing it out.

@@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
"sections": [
"SCHEDULE"
],
"requires": ["NETWORK", "BRANPROP"],
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was not really aware of this feature, have we had it all the time?!?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

have we had [requires/prohibits] all the time?!?

The feature was introduced in October 2020 (PR #1996), but it's not particularly widely deployed. Most of its usage is in the table input code, and especially in the saturation functions (SOF3 etc.) to reject decks using saturation function tables from both families.

Copy link
Member Author

@bska bska left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks a lot for your review. I've tried to address your comments.

@@ -68,6 +75,10 @@ BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(Branch) {

BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(INVALID_DOWNTREE_NODE) {
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

but after the change won't both just throw due to both NETWORK and GRUPNET?

I don't see GRUPNET here. There is GRUPTREE but no GRUPNET as far as I can tell.

@@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
"sections": [
"SCHEDULE"
],
"requires": ["NETWORK", "BRANPROP"],
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

have we had [requires/prohibits] all the time?!?

The feature was introduced in October 2020 (PR #1996), but it's not particularly widely deployed. Most of its usage is in the table input code, and especially in the saturation functions (SOF3 etc.) to reject decks using saturation function tables from both families.

@bska
Copy link
Member Author

bska commented Jan 31, 2024

PR approved and build check is green. I'll merge into master.

@bska bska merged commit a4049a0 into OPM:master Jan 31, 2024
1 check passed
@bska bska deleted the impose-network-kw-consistency branch January 31, 2024 16:03
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.

2 participants