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

Method to Convert InputData.ParameterInput back to ElementTree XML node(s) #2264

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 21, 2024

Conversation

GabrielSoto-INL
Copy link
Collaborator

@GabrielSoto-INL GabrielSoto-INL commented Feb 16, 2024


Pull Request Description

What issue does this change request address? (Use "#" before the issue to link it, i.e., #42.)

#2263

What are the significant changes in functionality due to this change request?

Offers the ability for the ravenframework.utils.InputData ParameterInput class to loop through itself and subnodes and convert the data back to xml.etree.ElementTree.Element object/format.


For Change Control Board: Change Request Review

The following review must be completed by an authorized member of the Change Control Board.

  • 1. Review all computer code.
  • 2. If any changes occur to the input syntax, there must be an accompanying change to the user manual and xsd schema. If the input syntax change deprecates existing input files, a conversion script needs to be added (see Conversion Scripts).
  • 3. Make sure the Python code and commenting standards are respected (camelBack, etc.) - See on the wiki for details.
  • 4. Automated Tests should pass, including run_tests, pylint, manual building and xsd tests. If there are changes to Simulation.py or JobHandler.py the qsub tests must pass.
  • 5. If significant functionality is added, there must be tests added to check this. Tests should cover all possible options. Multiple short tests are preferred over one large test. If new development on the internal JobHandler parallel system is performed, a cluster test must be added setting, in XML block, the node <internalParallel> to True.
  • 6. If the change modifies or adds a requirement or a requirement based test case, the Change Control Board's Chair or designee also needs to approve the change. The requirements and the requirements test shall be in sync.
  • 7. The merge request must reference an issue. If the issue is closed, the issue close checklist shall be done.
  • 8. If an analytic test is changed/added is the the analytic documentation updated/added?
  • 9. If any test used as a basis for documentation examples (currently found in raven/tests/framework/user_guide and raven/docs/workshop) have been changed, the associated documentation must be reviewed and assured the text matches the example.

Copy link
Collaborator

@dylanjm dylanjm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changes are good and no major functionality has been changed. Would you be willing to add a unit test for this under raven/tests/framework/unit_tests/utils?

Copy link
Collaborator

@dylanjm dylanjm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changes: good
Tests: added
Code: blessed
Merge: ready 👍

@dylanjm dylanjm merged commit fc625db into idaholab:devel Mar 21, 2024
12 checks passed
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