Hello Andrew,
>> Just for clarity.
>> Do you agree that the following notation is meaningless?
>> sum{(2,3) in E} c[i,j] * x[i,j]
The following model is correctly solved by GLPK:
set E := {(2,3)};
var v{(i,j) in E};
s.t. con1 {(i,j) in E} : v[i,j] - sum{(2,k) in E : k == j} 1 = 0;
var w{(i,j) in E};
s.t. con2 {(i,j) in E} : w[i,j] - sum{(k,3) in E : k == i} 1 = 0;
solve;
display v,w;
Why shoudn't
s.t. con1 {(i,j) in E} : v[i,j] - sum{(2,3) in E} 1 = 0;
work?
Best regards
Xypron
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/0-ary-slice-not-allowed-tp20707760p20710546.html
Sent from the Gnu - GLPK - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Bug-glpk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-glpk
