fix parallel input or output interconnect bug (issue #1015) #1017
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
1d239a7 to
1964a86
Compare
control/nlsys.py
Outdated
| specification (including the optional gain term). Numbered outputs | ||
| must be chosen from the list of subsystem outputs, but named | ||
| outputs can also be contained in the list of subsystem inputs. | ||
| mapped to overall system outputs. The entris for a connection are |
slivingston
reviewed
Jul 3, 2024
slivingston
approved these changes
Jul 7, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR fixes the bug identified in #1015, where specification of a list of signals as the input was not handled properly (each signal in the list was treated as a separate input rather than connecting a single input to the list). There was a similar bug in the output processing code. Unit test that exposes the bug included.
I think this code can be cleaned up a bit (to avoid the duplication in processing for the two cases), but want to get a fix out quickly since there is no easy workaround.
(Also found and fixed a typo in a docstring.)