Skip to content

Conversation

@beutlich
Copy link
Member

@beutlich beutlich commented Mar 9, 2019

Close #2425.

@beutlich beutlich added enhancement New feature or enhancement L: Mechanics.MultiBody Issue addresses Modelica.Mechanics.MultiBody labels Mar 9, 2019
@beutlich beutlich added this to the MSL4.0.0 milestone Mar 9, 2019
@beutlich beutlich self-assigned this Mar 9, 2019
@beutlich beutlich force-pushed the issue2425-move-ZeroForceAndTorque branch from adc48ba to 7d84320 Compare March 11, 2019 09:47
tobolar
tobolar previously approved these changes Mar 11, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@tobolar tobolar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fine to me. Thanks.

@beutlich beutlich force-pushed the issue2425-move-ZeroForceAndTorque branch from 7d84320 to f2489aa Compare March 25, 2019 20:57
@beutlich beutlich marked this pull request as ready for review March 25, 2019 20:58
@beutlich beutlich requested a review from HansOlsson March 25, 2019 20:58
@beutlich
Copy link
Member Author

beutlich commented Mar 25, 2019

@tobolar Please update your approval. Thanks.

Copy link
Contributor

@tobolar tobolar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There are no instances' annotations in the ModelicaTestConversion4 at the moment but I suppose it's fine to have some in a case the unit test has been composed in diagram layer.

@beutlich
Copy link
Member Author

There are no instances' annotations in the ModelicaTestConversion4 at the moment but I suppose it's fine to have some in a case the unit test has been composed in diagram layer.

Yes, Placement annotations are not required for a conversion test. I tried to keep the test model minimal.

@tobolar
Copy link
Contributor

tobolar commented Mar 26, 2019

But this is no obligation, is it? It is easy in many cases to simply assembly a test unit in the diagram layer but tedious to delete the annotations after that.

@beutlich
Copy link
Member Author

Right, no obligation.

Copy link
Contributor

@HansOlsson HansOlsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks ok.
I understand the reason for this is that even if it is useful in sensors it is also useful in other cases.

@beutlich beutlich merged commit 3ab352e into modelica:master Mar 26, 2019
@beutlich beutlich deleted the issue2425-move-ZeroForceAndTorque branch March 26, 2019 13:04
@tobolar
Copy link
Contributor

tobolar commented Mar 26, 2019

@HansOlsson Exactly.

@beutlich beutlich added task General work that is not related to a bug or feature and removed enhancement New feature or enhancement labels May 27, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

L: Mechanics.MultiBody Issue addresses Modelica.Mechanics.MultiBody task General work that is not related to a bug or feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Move ZeroForceAndTorque into Modelica.Mechanics.MultiBody.Forces.Internal

3 participants