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

Duplicate References to Models in Examples #2773

Open
Ant13731 opened this issue Aug 9, 2021 · 3 comments
Open

Duplicate References to Models in Examples #2773

Ant13731 opened this issue Aug 9, 2021 · 3 comments
Labels
verify-fixed When an issue seems fixed, but someone needs to check

Comments

@Ant13731
Copy link
Collaborator

Ant13731 commented Aug 9, 2021

I think this may be the result of how the recipes are made, but the logs I'm working on (in #2759) showed some duplicate references using the angular displacement instance model in dblpendulum under the requirements section:
image
The first statement should probably be grouped so that the two variables are listed as

θ and θ_p (from IM:calOfAngularDisplacement)

and the second statement should not reference the same variable from the same instance model twice.

@Ant13731
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Keeping this issue open to make sure we check for other occurrences of things like this.

@Ant13731 Ant13731 changed the title Duplicate References in DblPendulum Duplicate References to Models in Examples Aug 10, 2021
@JacquesCarette
Copy link
Owner

Yes, it would be nice to at least identify if there are other such occurrences and make issues.

@Ant13731
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ant13731 commented Aug 20, 2021

It seems that most of the duplicate occurrences of chunks in the logs are a result of models and definitions referring to the same thing in more than one place (ex. gamephysics' IM:transMot references DD:linAcc twice: once in the Notes section and once in the derivation). This isn't necessarily wrong, but could be improved by completing #1206, and making the description field included references for symbols (as in #1050 (comment)).

Edit: This also appears in NoPCM, where τ_W is referenced in the notes:
image
And in the derivation:
image

I don't think this is a bad thing, as it gives the user more information about τ_W in the places where it is used.

@balacij balacij added the verify-fixed When an issue seems fixed, but someone needs to check label Apr 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
verify-fixed When an issue seems fixed, but someone needs to check
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants