[docs] remove src lines. All tutorials should show all lines (#4126)

Author: odow

docs/make.jl

@@ -106,11 +106,6 @@ function _literate_directory(dir)
         end
     end
     for filename in _file_list(dir, dir, ".jl")
-        # `include` the file to test it before `#src` lines are removed. It is
-        # in a testset to isolate local variables between files.
-        Test.@testset "$(filename)" begin
-            _include_sandbox(filename)
-        end
         Literate.markdown(
             filename,
             dir;

docs/src/tutorials/algorithms/benders_decomposition.jl

@@ -166,12 +166,12 @@ set_silent(model)
 @constraint(model, [i = 2:(n-1)], sum(y[i, :]) == sum(y[:, i]))
 @objective(model, Min, 0.1 * sum(x) - sum(y[1, :]))
 optimize!(model)
-assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 solution_summary(model)
 
 # The optimal objective value is -5.1:
 
-Test.@test isapprox(objective_value(model), -5.1; atol = 1e-4)  #src
+Test.@test isapprox(objective_value(model), -5.1; atol = 1e-4)
 objective_value(model)
 
 # and the optimal flows are:
@@ -434,8 +434,7 @@ inplace_solution = optimal_flows(optimal_ret.y)
 
 # which is the same as the monolithic solution:
 
-Test.@test inplace_solution == monolithic_solution  #src
-inplace_solution == monolithic_solution
+Test.@test inplace_solution == monolithic_solution
 
 # ## Feasibility cuts
 
@@ -541,5 +540,4 @@ feasible_inplace_solution = optimal_flows(optimal_ret.y)
 # which is the same as the monolithic solution (because `sum(y) >= 1` in the
 # monolithic solution):
 
-Test.@test feasible_inplace_solution == monolithic_solution  #src
-feasible_inplace_solution == monolithic_solution
+Test.@test feasible_inplace_solution == monolithic_solution

docs/src/tutorials/algorithms/cutting_stock_column_generation.jl

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ import DataFrames
 import HiGHS
 import Plots
 import SparseArrays
-import Test  #src
+import Test
 
 # ## Background
 
@@ -236,8 +236,8 @@ set_silent(model)
 @constraint(model, demand[i in 1:I], patterns[i]' * x >= data.pieces[i].d)
 optimize!(model)
 assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
+Test.@test isapprox(objective_value(model), 386; atol = 1e-6)
 solution_summary(model)
-Test.@test isapprox(objective_value(model), 386; atol = 1e-6)  #src
 
 # This solution requires 386 rolls. This solution is sub-optimal because the
 # model does not contain the full set of possible patterns.
@@ -359,8 +359,7 @@ filter!(row -> row.rolls > 0, solution)
 # solutions. We can create a integer feasible solution by rounding up the
 # orders. This requires 306 rolls:
 
-Test.@test sum(ceil.(Int, solution.rolls)) == 306  #src
-sum(ceil.(Int, solution.rolls))
+Test.@test sum(ceil.(Int, solution.rolls)) == 306
 
 # Alternatively, we can re-introduce the integrality constraints and resolve the
 # problem:
@@ -375,7 +374,7 @@ filter!(row -> row.rolls > 0, solution)
 
 # This now requires 299 rolls:
 
-Test.@test isapprox(sum(solution.rolls), 299; atol = 1e-6)  #src
+Test.@test isapprox(sum(solution.rolls), 299; atol = 1e-6)
 sum(solution.rolls)
 
 # Note that this may not be the global minimum because we are not adding new

docs/src/tutorials/applications/optimal_power_flow.jl

@@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ set_silent(model)
 # real power range (all 10, as it turns out in this case):
 
 basic_lower_bound = value(lower_bound, objective_function(model));
-Test.@test isapprox(basic_lower_bound, 1188.75; atol = 1e-2)  #src
+Test.@test isapprox(basic_lower_bound, 1188.75; atol = 1e-2)
 println("Objective value (basic lower bound) : $basic_lower_bound")
 
 # to see that we can do no better than an objective cost of 1188.75.
@@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ P_G = real(S_G)
 
 optimize!(model)
 assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
-Test.@test isapprox(objective_value(model), 3087.84; atol = 1e-2)  #src
+Test.@test isapprox(objective_value(model), 3087.84; atol = 1e-2)
 solution_summary(model)
 
 #-
@@ -422,7 +422,7 @@ optimize!(model)
 
 assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model; allow_almost = true)
 sdp_relaxation_lower_bound = round(objective_value(model); digits = 2)
-Test.@test isapprox(sdp_relaxation_lower_bound, 2753.04; rtol = 1e-3)     #src
+Test.@test isapprox(sdp_relaxation_lower_bound, 2753.04; rtol = 1e-3)
 println(
     "Objective value (W & V relax. lower bound): $sdp_relaxation_lower_bound",
 )

docs/src/tutorials/conic/arbitrary_precision.jl

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
 using JuMP
 import CDDLib
 import Clarabel
-import Test     #src
+import Test
 
 # ## Higher-precision arithmetic
 
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ value.(x) .- [3 // 7, 3 // 14]
 
 # The primal feasibility violation is on the order of `1e-16`
 
-Test.@test 1e-16 <= maximum(values(primal_feasibility_report(model))) <= 1e-15 #src
+Test.@test 1e-16 <= maximum(values(primal_feasibility_report(model))) <= 1e-15
 primal_feasibility_report(model)
 
 # But by reducing the tolerances, we can obtain a more accurate solution:
@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ value.(x) .- [3 // 7, 3 // 14]
 
 # The primal feasibility violation is also much smaller:
 
-Test.@test maximum(values(primal_feasibility_report(model))) < 1e-30  #src
+Test.@test maximum(values(primal_feasibility_report(model))) < 1e-30
 primal_feasibility_report(model)
 
 # ## Rational arithmetic
@@ -176,5 +176,5 @@ value(c2)
 # Because the solution is in exact arithmetic, there are no primal
 # infeasibilities:
 
-Test.@test isempty(primal_feasibility_report(model))  #src
+Test.@test isempty(primal_feasibility_report(model))
 primal_feasibility_report(model)

docs/src/tutorials/conic/ellipse_approx.jl

@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ f = [1 - S[i, :]' * Z * S[i, :] + 2 * S[i, :]' * z - s for i in 1:m]
 @objective(model, Max, 1 * t + 0)
 optimize!(model)
 assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
-Test.@test isapprox(D, value.(Z); atol = 1e-3)  #src
+Test.@test isapprox(D, value.(Z); atol = 1e-3)
 solve_time_1 = solve_time(model)
 
 # This formulation gives the much smaller graph:
@@ -242,7 +242,7 @@ f = [1 - S[i, :]' * Z * S[i, :] + 2 * S[i, :]' * z - s for i in 1:m]
 @objective(model, Max, 1 * t + 0)
 optimize!(model)
 assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
-Test.@test isapprox(D, value.(Z); atol = 1e-3)  #src
+Test.@test isapprox(D, value.(Z); atol = 1e-3)
 solve_time_2 = solve_time(model)
 
 # This formulation gives the much smaller graph:

docs/src/tutorials/conic/min_ellipse.jl

@@ -136,8 +136,8 @@ q = P \ value.(P_q)
 # Finally, overlaying the solution in the plot we see the minimal area enclosing
 # ellipsoid:
 
-Test.@test isapprox(P, [0.4237 -0.0396; -0.0396 0.3163]; atol = 1e-2)  #src
-Test.@test isapprox(q, [-0.3960, -0.0214]; atol = 1e-2)                #src
+Test.@test isapprox(P, [0.4237 -0.0396; -0.0396 0.3163]; atol = 1e-2)
+Test.@test isapprox(q, [-0.3960, -0.0214]; atol = 1e-2)
 
 Plots.plot!(
     plot,

docs/src/tutorials/conic/simple_examples.jl

@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ function example_k_means_clustering()
     assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
     Z_val = value.(Z)
     current_cluster, visited = 0, Set{Int}()
-    solution = [1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2]  #src
+    solution = [1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2]
     for i in 1:m
         if !(i in visited)
             current_cluster += 1
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ function example_k_means_clustering()
                 if isapprox(Z_val[i, i], Z_val[i, j]; atol = 1e-3)
                     println(a[j])
                     push!(visited, j)
-                    Test.@test solution[j] == current_cluster  #src
+                    Test.@test solution[j] == current_cluster
                 end
             end
         end
@@ -218,12 +218,12 @@ function example_correlation_problem()
     optimize!(model)
     assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
     println("An upper bound for ρ_AC is $(value(ρ["A", "C"]))")
-    Test.@test value(ρ["A", "C"]) ≈ 0.87195 atol = 1e-4  #src
+    Test.@test value(ρ["A", "C"]) ≈ 0.87195 atol = 1e-4
     @objective(model, Min, ρ["A", "C"])
     optimize!(model)
     assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
     println("A lower bound for ρ_AC is $(value(ρ["A", "C"]))")
-    Test.@test value(ρ["A", "C"]) ≈ -0.978 atol = 1e-3  #src
+    Test.@test value(ρ["A", "C"]) ≈ -0.978 atol = 1e-3
     return
 end
 

docs/src/tutorials/getting_started/sum_if.jl

@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ nodes, edges, demand = build_random_graph(1_000, 2_000)
 run_times = Float64[]
 factors = 1:10
 for factor in factors
-    GC.gc()  #src
+    GC.gc()
     graph = build_random_graph(1_000 * factor, 5_000 * factor)
     push!(run_times, @elapsed build_naive_model(graph...))
 end
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ run_times_naive = Float64[]
 run_times_cached = Float64[]
 factors = 1:10
 for factor in factors
-    GC.gc()  #src
+    GC.gc()
     graph = build_random_graph(1_000 * factor, 5_000 * factor)
     push!(run_times_naive, @elapsed build_naive_model(graph...))
     push!(run_times_cached, @elapsed build_cached_model(graph...))

docs/src/tutorials/getting_started/tolerances.jl

@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ set_silent(model)
 @variable(model, x >= 0)
 @constraint(model, x == -1e-8)
 optimize!(model)
-assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 #-
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ value(x)
 
 set_attribute(model, "primal_feasibility_tolerance", 1e-10)
 optimize!(model)
-@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # ### Realistic example
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ optimize!(model)
 
 # SCS reports that it solved the problem to optimality:
 
-assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # and that the solution for `x[1]` is nearly zero:
@@ -199,7 +199,6 @@ optimize!(model)
 
 #-
 
-assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
 assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 value(x[1])
 
@@ -234,12 +233,12 @@ set_attribute(model, "presolve", "off")
 set_attribute(model, "mip_heuristic_run_feasibility_jump", false)
 @variable(model, x == 1 + 1e-6, Int)
 optimize!(model)
-assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # HiGHS found an optimal solution, and the value of `x` is:
 
-@assert isapprox(value(x), 1.000001)  #src
+@assert isapprox(value(x), 1.000001)
 value(x)
 
 # In other words, HiGHS thinks that the solution `x = 1.000001` satisfies the
@@ -255,7 +254,7 @@ primal_feasibility_report(model)
 
 set_attribute(model, "mip_feasibility_tolerance", 1e-10)
 optimize!(model)
-@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # ### Realistic example
@@ -348,7 +347,7 @@ set_silent(model)
 @variable(model, y >= 0)
 @constraint(model, x + 1e8 * y == -1)
 optimize!(model)
-@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # The feasible solution `(x, y) = (0.0, -1e-8)` has a maximum primal violation
@@ -371,7 +370,7 @@ set_silent(model)
 @constraint(model, y <= 0.5)
 @constraint(model, x <= M * y)
 optimize!(model)
-@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+@assert !is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # HiGHS reports the problem is infeasible, but there is a feasible (to
@@ -394,7 +393,7 @@ set_start_value(y, 1e-6)
 # Now HiGHS will report that the problem is feasible:
 
 optimize!(model)
-assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)  #src
+assert_is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 is_solved_and_feasible(model)
 
 # ## Problem is optimal, solution is infeasible