Fix brown field investment for links #34
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jnnr
changed the title
|
Can I hand this to you, @MaGering? |
|
Keep in mind this #96 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When expanding links, any existing
from_to_capacityandto_from_capacity> 0 will be ignored. This happens because the method Facade._investment() passes the value ofcapacityto the atrributeexistingof the investment object. To be correct, it should passfrom_to_capacityor the other, respectively.We could add another case to the if else clause. Or better, think of something more clean. Currently, this PR only includes the constraint test, not the fix.
TODO