#12823: Allow constants for objective function & deletion of rows in
MixedIntegerLinearProgram
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: john_perry | Owner: ncohen
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.0
Component: linear programming | Resolution:
Keywords: solver objective | Work issues: failing doctests
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: john_perry, ncohen | Merged in:
Dependencies: 12833 | Stopgaps:
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by ncohen):
> > Well, I would prefer much more to have only remove_constraint than
remove_constraintS. Otherwise we will be calling remove_constraints([1])
which looks a bit odd.
>
> Amusingly enough, I think `remove_constraint([1,2,3])` looks far more
odd than `remove_constraints([1])`.
Ahahahah. What about remove_constraint(1) when you just have one
constraint to remove ? `:-D`
> I'm not quite following what you're saying. Can you be more specific?
Of course ! What I do not like with the current implementation is that
many functions (plus their documentation) are very long and essentially do
the work done by the previous function several times. Like add-
variable(s), add_linear_constraint(s), and now remove_constraint(s).
It would be easy to have both at the same time at no cost. We could define
for each backend the function without the s, exactly as it is, and define
in generic_backend the function with a S, which would just repeatedly call
the previous function. This way, all the backends would inherit this
abstract function, so it would be available in the backends, but we would
be able to remove all the duplicated code from the specific backends.
Does that sound like a bad idea to you ?
> I don't understand why that makes it a mistake.
Because it was done like a mistake. It was done without properly thinking
about how it would be used by other people. Even if it is not so bad after
all, it was still done out of careless work `:-)`
Nathann
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12823#comment:22>
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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
