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.

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

Remove matrix-product with the structure only #382

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 23, 2021
Merged

Conversation

tmigot
Copy link
Member

@tmigot tmigot commented Nov 15, 2021

I let:

jac_op!(nlp, x, rows, cols, Jv, Jtv)
hess_op!(nlp, x, rows, cols, Hv; obj_weight=1.0)
hess_op!(nlp, x, y, rows, cols, Hv; obj_weight=1.0)

and

jac_op_residual!(nls, x, rows, cols, Jv, Jtv)

in case initializing LinearOperators benefit from the structure.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 15, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #382 (603fd0b) into main (f8ed18a) will decrease coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #382      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   99.65%   99.64%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          13       13              
  Lines         587      563      -24     
==========================================
- Hits          585      561      -24     
  Misses          2        2              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/nlp/api.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/nls/api.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/nlp/meta.jl 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/nlp/show.jl 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/nls/utils.jl 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/nlp/counters.jl 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/nls/counters.jl 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/nlp/utils.jl 95.65% <0.00%> (+0.53%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f8ed18a...603fd0b. Read the comment docs.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Package name latest stable
ADNLPModels.jl
AmplNLReader.jl
CUTEst.jl
CaNNOLeS.jl
DCISolver.jl
JSOSolvers.jl
LLSModels.jl
NLPModelsIpopt.jl
NLPModelsJuMP.jl
NLPModelsModifiers.jl
NLPModelsTest.jl
PDENLPModels.jl
Percival.jl
QuadraticModels.jl
SolverBenchmark.jl
SolverCore.jl
SolverTest.jl
SolverTools.jl

@tmigot
Copy link
Member Author

tmigot commented Nov 15, 2021

@dpo @abelsiqueira it's trickier than expected to know if any of this is useful because it is tested in NLPModelsTest.jl. So, all the packages using these tests fail.

@abelsiqueira
Copy link
Member

But at least we know that Percival and DCISolver don't need it.

@abelsiqueira
Copy link
Member

We can update NLPModelsTest removing the test before this.

@dpo
Copy link
Member

dpo commented Nov 15, 2021

in case initializing LinearOperators benefit from the structure.

I don't think it's the case. IMO, those should be removed too.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Package name latest stable
ADNLPModels.jl
AmplNLReader.jl
CUTEst.jl
CaNNOLeS.jl
DCISolver.jl
JSOSolvers.jl
LLSModels.jl
NLPModelsIpopt.jl
NLPModelsJuMP.jl
NLPModelsModifiers.jl
NLPModelsTest.jl
PDENLPModels.jl
Percival.jl
QuadraticModels.jl
SolverBenchmark.jl
SolverCore.jl
SolverTest.jl
SolverTools.jl

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Package name latest stable
ADNLPModels.jl
AmplNLReader.jl
CUTEst.jl
CaNNOLeS.jl
DCISolver.jl
JSOSolvers.jl
LLSModels.jl
NLPModelsIpopt.jl
NLPModelsJuMP.jl
NLPModelsModifiers.jl
NLPModelsTest.jl
PDENLPModels.jl
Percival.jl
QuadraticModels.jl
SolverBenchmark.jl
SolverCore.jl
SolverTest.jl
SolverTools.jl

@tmigot
Copy link
Member Author

tmigot commented Nov 22, 2021

I prepared the two PR to fix the breakage of AmplNLReader.jl and NLPModelsModifiers.jl, so this can be reviewed.

Copy link
Member

@dpo dpo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@abelsiqueira abelsiqueira merged commit f160a67 into main Nov 23, 2021
@abelsiqueira abelsiqueira deleted the rmv-jprod-struct branch November 23, 2021 19:40
@abelsiqueira
Copy link
Member

Thank you!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants