RFC: Remove zero initialization on Integrator, Derivative, and FirstOrder #308
Conversation
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
…rder As started to be discussed in the other thread, these are the only three `= 0` in this package that seem like they have a reasonable argument for it. There is a use case for which the integrator's starting value could be defined by an outside value, in which case this no `= 0` default is better as you will otherwise "accidentally" add an extra initial equation and fail initialization, unless you do `= nothing` (needs to be added). But, is this better for the normal user?
|
@bradcarman @baggepinnen @mtiller-jh for comments. |
|
My comments are here #306 (comment) and a few posts after that |
|
At least for now, we aren't doing this. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As started to be discussed in the other thread, these are the only three
= 0in this package that seem like they have a reasonable argument for it. There is a use case for which the integrator's starting value could be defined by an outside value, in which case this no= 0default is better as you will otherwise "accidentally" add an extra initial equation and fail initialization, unless you do= nothing(needs to be added).But, is this better for the normal user?