Operation Evaluation

Description of issue:

Implement the evaluation function of an operation.

Linked Requirements:

( 11 )

Potential Issues:

None

Blockers:

( #1 (closed), #2 (closed), #3 (closed) )

Issue Requirements:

1. The function should return the result of the operation given data in.
2. The evaluate function should be able to parse Python code as long as the code returns a numerical value.

Comment:

None

added 1 deleted label

changed the description

changed the description

marked this issue as related to #1 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #2 (closed)

marked this issue as related to #3 (closed)

changed title from Operationsevaluering to Operation Evaluation

changed the description

mentioned in issue #9 (closed)

mentioned in issue #12 (closed)

mentioned in issue #18 (closed)

mentioned in issue #24 (closed)

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

added 1 deleted label

changed time estimate to 2d 5h

changed milestone to %Sprint 1

assigned to @anglo547

assigned to @jacwa448 and unassigned @anglo547

created branch 5-operation-evaluation to address this issue

Have looked into the psuedo code and tried to understand it, have some issues understanding how the SimulationState and OperationState are supposed to be used.

added 2h of time spent at 2020-03-02

assigned to @raska119 and unassigned @jacwa448

Have looked at and understood pre-existing code, and have made some modifications to work with the current code for signal-interface. Testing is available with current modifications, but Will have to change code when signal allows for code like "signal-/port.value" and connecting with signal/port between operations.

added 7h of time spent at 2020-03-05

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

changed time estimate to 5h

changed time estimate to 1d

changed time estimate to 5h

changed milestone to %Sprint 2

What is the status on this one? @raska119

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

The function that is implementet should be called evaluate_output. Just like it is in the class diagram.

added 1 deleted label

assigned to @anglo547 and unassigned @raska119

changed milestone to %Period 1 Kanban

Have been thinking a bit about use-cases for this issue, however realized I need more insight into what is expected of the functionality to this issue.

added 30m of time spent at 2020-04-06

Use-cases:

• As a developer I want to be able to evaluate a specific output port of an operation based on the index of the output port and numerical values for the operations input ports. The evaluation should use an already implemented "evaluate" function.
• As a developer I want to be able to evaluate a specific output port of an operation with real valued input values.
• As a developer I want to be able to evaluate a specific output port of an operation with imaginary valued input values.

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

added 30m of time spent at 2020-04-06

Requesting use-case review from @jacwa448

Use cases LGTM.

added Needs testing label and removed 1 deleted label

Added tests for evaluate_output of real and complex numbers for single output. I will now implement code that solves these tests.

Decided that it would be great if we had an operation with multiple outputs for testing, so I decided that I will implement the Butterfly operation and add it to core_operations afterwards.

added 1h of time spent at 2020-04-06

added 30m of time spent at 2020-04-06

Added code that implements evaluate_output and works with the tests.

Will now implement Butterfly in core_operations.

added 1h of time spent at 2020-04-06

created branch 5-operation-evaluation-2 to address this issue

Added test and code for Butterfly operation. Will now add test case for evaluate_output for multiple outputs.

added 30m of time spent at 2020-04-06

Added tests for evaluate_output for multiple outputs. Should be ready to merge now.

added 30m of time spent at 2020-04-06

added Feature development label and removed Needs testing label

mentioned in merge request !17 (merged)

Added merge request for this issue in !17 (merged)

added Needs review label and removed Feature development label

Fixed some merge request comments.

added 30m of time spent at 2020-04-06

added 1 deleted label and removed Needs review label

Closed when merging !17 (merged)

closed