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

WIP: fixes for MTK changes #1186

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

WIP: fixes for MTK changes #1186

wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

TorkelE
Copy link
Member

@TorkelE TorkelE commented Feb 17, 2025

Updates conservation laws to work with new remake version.

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

This is probably never going to pass tests with the change in semantics for complete. We can no longer rely on the parameters of a completed system being the same as what was defined when creating the system, which I think a lot of tests rely on.

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

We can also no longer rely on issetequal(parmeters(sys), get_ps(sys)) for a flattened system.

@TorkelE
Copy link
Member Author

TorkelE commented Feb 18, 2025

Let's see how this turns out. If something like what you suggest is really changing it would be one of the largest changes to Catalyst ever, probably after moving to maps as inputs to problems. Would probably take ages to figure out all the implications.

@isaacsas isaacsas changed the title Check new remake version WIP: fixes for MTK changes Feb 26, 2025
@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

@TorkelE let's just work in this PR to try to get tests working again.

I've handled the conservation law constants getting scalarized issue, and locally gotten tests in reactionsystem.jl working again.

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

TODO:

  • isequivalent needs more comprehensive testing (perhaps a followup PR)?

@TorkelE
Copy link
Member Author

TorkelE commented Feb 26, 2025

I had some updates locally to sort out the new parameters, but there are quite a few recent MTK issues that are hard-blocking us so I stopped a bit:
SciML/ModelingToolkit.jl#3411
SciML/ModelingToolkit.jl#3410
SciML/ModelingToolkit.jl#3409
SciML/ModelingToolkit.jl#3408
SciML/ModelingToolkit.jl#3396

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

OK, I'll get as much fixed here as I can modulo those issues and then plan to merge.

FYI, take a look at the changes to isequivalent. The nice feature is I added a debug kwarg that will printout specifically which fields are not the same. (I seem to always want this functionality when writing tests).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants