Remove creation of some redundant constraints.#54
Merged
Conversation
This just helps with the performance on the algorithm (relevant for large problems). I've had to modify the tutorial because the solution that was being output is no longer the same (both solutions are valid).
alexwlchan
reviewed
May 6, 2017
| f'{label} - event: {event}, slot: {slot}', | ||
| X[(event, slot)] + X[(other_event, other_slot)] <= 1 | ||
| ) | ||
| if events[event].tags is not []: |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you mean to test identity here, or just equality? Since the second half of the comparison will be created every time, I think this always returns True:
>>> [] is not []
True
>>> x = []
>>> x is not []
True
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This just helps with the performance of the algorithm (relevant for
large problems). I've had to modify the tutorial because the solution
that was being output is no longer the same (both solutions are valid).