-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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
Bug fixes for TTO #28
Conversation
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.
Mostly looks good, some minor comments to address
@@ -547,19 +547,19 @@ def _compose_vocs(self) -> (VOCS, List[str]): | |||
if critical: | |||
critical_constraints.append(con_name) | |||
|
|||
states = {} | |||
states = [] |
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.
can we rename states
variables in Badger to observables such that it is consistent with Xopt? or do they mean something different?
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.
Sure thing! They mean the same, the concern was that the observables here get confused with the observables in Badger env, but maybe I'm overthinking
@@ -151,7 +151,10 @@ def __init__(self): | |||
|
|||
@property | |||
def vocs(self) -> VOCS: | |||
return self.routine.vocs | |||
if self.routine is None: | |||
return None |
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.
are we sure we want to return None here? I suggest that we raise an error saying that not routine has been specified instead. Might be easier for the user to debug
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.
It's a valid status that the run monitor doesn't hold a routine -- say when the user just gets started and creates a few routines without running them, in this case, if the user doesn’t select any routine in the list the run monitor should be in this empty status
@@ -477,18 +483,14 @@ def init_plots(self, routine: Routine = None, run_filename: str = None): | |||
self.plot_sta | |||
except: | |||
self.plot_sta = plot_sta = add_axes( | |||
self.monitor, "Constants", 'Evaluation History (S)', | |||
self.inspector_state, row=1, col=0 | |||
self.monitor, "states", 'Evaluation History (S)', |
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.
relevant to the states question above
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 change to plot_obs
!
To prevent the current warning future error in empty array truth value.
The reason caused the instability was that, there could be multiple runs in that test session. So need to delete all runs before performing the rest of the tests.
Bug fixes
Remaining issues