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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

fixed get_decision_problem_docstring #1240

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2025
Merged

fixed get_decision_problem_docstring #1240

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2025

Conversation

annacasavant
Copy link
Contributor

  • deleted line 214 fixing get_decision_problem docstring

@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 7, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 77.46%. Comparing base (2c1cb5c) to head (c97f4c2).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1240      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.57%   77.46%   -0.11%     
==========================================
  Files         124      124              
  Lines       13817    13817              
==========================================
- Hits        10718    10704      -14     
- Misses       3099     3113      +14
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 77.46% <ø> (-0.11%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/simulation/simulation_results.jl 87.91% <ø> (ø)

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

@jd-lara jd-lara merged commit 6fc3590 into NREL-Sienna:main Feb 7, 2025
8 of 10 checks passed
GabrielKS added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 16, 2025
@GabrielKS
Fix docs build, add aux variable section
0f57a51 
#1240 surfaced an
issue in the `get_decision_problem_results` docstring that this fixes.
The other reason the docs build was failing is that the new power
flow-related auxiliary variables were not included; here I add a new
section and put all the auxiliary variables there.
@GabrielKS GabrielKS mentioned this pull request Feb 16, 2025
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jd-lara jd-lara jd-lara approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@annacasavant @jd-lara