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

Optional binary records and new parameter constructor #169

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 10, 2023

Conversation

prehner
Copy link
Contributor

@prehner prehner commented Jul 9, 2023

This PR comprises of two changes:

  • The binary_records in Parameter::from_records is made optional. This removes some boilerplate from models that do not use binary interaction parameters at all (ideal gas models and pure component models). If the models have a GC method, they still need a custom struct for binary records to implement all necessary traits.
  • A new constructor Parameter::from_model_records is added that internally creates the PureRecords using defaults for molarweight and identifier, and does not use binary records. This is necessary, because at the moment, it is not possible to create JobackParameters from records in Python, since there is no appropriate PureRecord around.

@prehner prehner force-pushed the optional_binary_records branch from 5d77ba6 to 866ff9b Compare July 9, 2023 15:40
@prehner prehner merged commit c5667fb into binary_association Jul 10, 2023
@prehner prehner deleted the optional_binary_records branch July 10, 2023 11:51
prehner added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 10, 2023
* Implement binary association parameters

* Optional binary records and new parameter constructor (#169)
prehner added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2023
* Implement binary association parameters

* Optional binary records and new parameter constructor (#169)
prehner added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 14, 2023
* Implement binary association parameters

* Optional binary records and new parameter constructor (#169)
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