#15686: Improve documentation of constraint_generation in
MixedIntegerLinearProgramming
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: | Owner:
equaeghe | Status: needs_review
Type: | Milestone: sage-6.2
defect | Resolution:
Priority: minor | Merged in:
Component: | Reviewers:
numerical | Work issues:
Keywords: | Commit:
Authors: | d0b48c62a7d6c1445017d53ee7d35df7a05d3037
Report Upstream: N/A | Stopgaps:
Branch: |
u/equaeghe/15686 |
Dependencies: |
-------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Changes (by equaeghe):
* status: needs_info => needs_review
* component: PLEASE CHANGE => numerical
Comment:
Replying to [comment:16 ncohen]:
>
> Sorry but I do not find this much clearer. Instead of repeating many
times "when solver=None" couldn't you add in the documentation of the
`solver` parameter that "when it is define the value of
`constraint_generation` is ignored" ?
I've made a modification much like the one you suggest, but in the
`constraint_generation` documentation
>But I don't know what a guy specifying both a solver and a value to
`constraint_generation` would expect `O_o`
Well, currently, as far as I can tell from the code, the selected solver
is used. Only if `solver=None` is the constraint_generation parameter
taken into account. The current reformulation is compatible with this.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15686#comment:19>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
