Sun 03 Jul 2016 11:48:50 AM UTC, comment #13:
Retagging from "Patch submitted" to "In progress".
|
Sun 03 Jul 2016 11:48:13 AM UTC, comment #12:
Ping!
Julien, would you like this patch to be considered for 4.2.0? If so, please explain it more fully?
|
Sun 29 Nov 2015 05:41:20 PM UTC, comment #11:
Extra comments might help. I looked at the patch a long time ago and didn't feel I understood it well enough to commit.
|
Sun 29 Nov 2015 09:35:32 AM UTC, comment #10:
Julien,
I'm going through old patches that haven't yet been committed. Yours looks great!
I don't understand your modifications to cf_ub_lb. Could you please add a comment to the code explaining the meanings of the input and output variables? (Improving the internal documentation is my other pet project...)
Thanks,
Lachlan
|
Sat 06 Dec 2014 07:38:54 PM UTC, comment #9:
Rik,
I have proposed a patch for item #2 (a long time ago, see below).
Have you looked at it ? Is there anything that needs to be improved before the patch can be applied ?
@++
Julien
|
Thu 23 Jan 2014 05:38:46 PM UTC, comment #8:
I re-titled the report to be specific about item #2 being the remaining issue to address.
|
Thu 23 Jan 2014 04:40:26 PM UTC, comment #7:
This is an old bug report, that lumps together four different issues related to sqp...
Items #1 and #4 have been dealt with.
A patch has been proposed for item #2 (see below).
Item #3 is still pending, but this is more a feature request than a bug report.
I suggest closing this old bug report, and re-opening a "feature request" ticket for issue #3 (and perhaps another ticket for item #2, if my patch is not deemed satisfactory).
|
Sat 11 Jan 2014 05:18:47 PM UTC, comment #6:
I applied the patch that defines a new return code here (http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/f58a6cd3f909).
|
Fri 20 Dec 2013 07:48:53 AM UTC, comment #5:
Hey Arun,
No need to post on the path tracker I think, your patch clearly belongs to this bug report.
@++
Julien
|
Fri 20 Dec 2013 12:13:30 AM UTC, comment #4:
Here's a patch for Item 1 (distinguish between convergence and small step size). New return value for small step size is 104. Normal convergence remains 101. I will post this to the patch tracker as well.
(file #30049)
|
Wed 13 Nov 2013 08:47:03 PM UTC, comment #3:
Here is a patch for Item 2 (missing bounds set to +/- REALMAX).
(file #29613)
|
Wed 13 Nov 2013 07:50:25 PM UTC, comment #2:
Item 4 of this bug report has been dealt with in changeset 11a9d448fdc3 ("Get rid of global variables in sqp.").
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/11a9d448fdc3
|
Mon 11 Nov 2013 07:41:23 AM UTC, comment #1:
Item 3 of this bug report is redundant with bug #32717.
|
Wed 29 Dec 2010 07:34:15 PM UTC, original submission:
This bug report exists to keep track of 4 improvements that need to be made to sqp. There is not enough time before the 3.4 release to tackle these now.
1) The return success code of 101 can be reached by two paths in the code. One path is a "true" success where all constraints are met. The other path is where the algorithm has stopped making progress because the stepsize has become too small. This second path should use a different return code because the result is not necessarily success.
2) When only one bound, upper or lower, is set the other defaults to -/+ REALMAX. This is unnecessary and undesirable. If no bound is set, no bound, even if very large, should be used.
3) If the function call to qp fails then the sqp code also fails. There should be a method to recover if the qp step alone fails.
4) The use of global variables should be eliminated. This prevents sqp from being called recursively and generally makes the code difficult to understand and maintain.
|