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

Refactoring template driver to dynamically create RAVEN workflows #391

Merged
merged 55 commits into from
Jan 29, 2025

Conversation

j-bryan
Copy link
Collaborator

@j-bryan j-bryan commented Nov 18, 2024


Pull Request Description

What issue does this change request address?

#390

What are the significant changes in functionality due to this change

This pull request restructures the templating system used to generate RAVEN workflows.

  • The RAVEN template and the template driver are separated into different classes.
  • A FeatureDriver class is introduced to define changes to a RAVEN template XML to add a single feature. For example, adding a Grid sampler to the RAVEN XML is done with one FeatureDriver instance, while adding the model used by the workflow is done with a different FeatureDriver.
  • FeatureDriver instances can be composed and grouped in FeatureCollection objects.
  • The template driver uses feature drivers to edit a template object.
  • Edits to the template XML are intended to be strictly additive. One aspect of the previous TemplateDriver implementation that I felt made the current state of the template XML unclear at times was not knowing which nodes were present at any given point in the code due to numerous additions, deletions, and edits made throughout the TemplateDriver. Moving to a strictly additive scheme while starting from a much smaller template XML reframes the template driver's function as adding the desired features to the XML, rather than deleting all other unneeded entities from the XML, as was common practice.
  • Addition of a "flat" RAVEN workflow template for specific cases which can be run as flat workflows.

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.
  • 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 tes.
  • 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, the the analytic documentation must be updated/added.
  • 9. If any test used as a basis for documentation examples have been changed, the associated documentation must be reviewed and assured the text matches the example.

@PaulTalbot-INL
Copy link
Collaborator

Wow, this is quite an effort! Do you have any diagramming or writeup for the logic flow? I think it's starting to make sense glancing over it, but some developer documentation would help get us up to speed on this new structure. Thanks for your work on this!

@j-bryan j-bryan marked this pull request as draft December 9, 2024 16:04
@j-bryan j-bryan marked this pull request as ready for review January 3, 2025 23:27
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.

Some minor changes and discussion points. I read heavily my assigned sections and then did a quick look over the rest of the files. I will review once more when all changes are submitted.

I was thinking, it might be nice to add some linting checks to our automated testing. Nothing that stops the tests from running, but just checking to make sure we are consistent. Almost like a coverage summary but for linting. @joshua-cogliati-inl @caleb-sitton-inl what are your thoughts on this?

doc/developers/templates.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/Cases.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/DispatchManager.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/Economics.py Show resolved Hide resolved
src/Placeholders.py Show resolved Hide resolved
src/Placeholders.py Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/debug_template.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/debug_template.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/debug_template.py Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/debug_template.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@joshua-cogliati-inl joshua-cogliati-inl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Some comments on templates/snippets

@classmethod
def from_xml(cls, node: ET.Element, **kwargs) -> "RavenSnippet":
"""
Alternate constructor which instantiates a new RavenSnippet objectfrom .n existing XML node
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should "objectfrom .n existing" be "object from an existing"?


class RavenSnippet(ET.Element):
"""
RavenSnippet class objects describe one contiguous snippet of RAVEN XML, inheritingfrom .he xml.etree.ElementTree.Element
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should "inheritingfrom .he" be "inheriting from the"?


def distribution_class_from_spec(spec) -> type[Distribution]:
"""
Make a new distribution classfrom .he RAVEN input spec for that class
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

change "classfrom .he" to "class from the"?

@ In, value, str, the type value to set
@ Out, None
"""
self.set("type", str(value))
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If the type of value is str, why is str(value) needed? (Ditto for "path")

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's unnecessary as long as the input type is respected. I'll remove in the interest of cleaner code.

templates/snippets/models.py Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/snippets/steps.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@GabrielSoto-INL GabrielSoto-INL self-requested a review January 23, 2025 15:02
@joshua-cogliati-inl
Copy link
Collaborator

I was thinking, it might be nice to add some linting checks to our automated testing. Nothing that stops the tests from running, but just checking to make sure we are consistent. Almost like a coverage summary but for linting. @joshua-cogliati-inl @caleb-sitton-inl what are your thoughts on this?

We use pylint on RAVEN, so this seems reasonable. (pylint is available in conda and pypi)

@j-bryan
Copy link
Collaborator Author

j-bryan commented Jan 23, 2025

I was aware of pylint but hadn't made much use of it before. I was looking through some issues it brought up in my code for this PR and fixed some of the issues it brought up. I agree it would be good to add in a way similar to how it's used by RAVEN.

Copy link
Collaborator

@GabrielSoto-INL GabrielSoto-INL left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Couple of linting errors, some comments and questions. Fantastic work so far, big fan of the changes

templates/template_driver.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/template_driver.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/raven_template.py Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/raven_template.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/raven_template.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/unit_tests/test_listproperty.py Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/integration_tests/mechanics/csv_and_arma_fail/tests Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

@joshua-cogliati-inl joshua-cogliati-inl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have reviewed HERON/tests/unit_tests/snippets and HERON/templates/xml.

tests/unit_tests/snippets/test_optimizers.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@j-bryan j-bryan changed the title [WIP] Refactoring template driver to dynamically create RAVEN workflows Refactoring template driver to dynamically create RAVEN workflows Jan 28, 2025
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.

Just two minor changes.

templates/decorators.py Show resolved Hide resolved
templates/decorators.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@j-bryan j-bryan requested a review from dylanjm January 28, 2025 20:35
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.

I'm thinking these changes look pretty good. Nothing stands out to me to halt this PR any further. Tests have been added for new functionality and features remain compatible with previous versions of HERON, so no need for a user group email (since this is more of a developer improvement anyway.)

@dylanjm dylanjm dismissed GabrielSoto-INL’s stale review January 28, 2025 22:08

Jacob addressed Gabe's comments.

@dylanjm dylanjm merged commit dcaa3a9 into idaholab:devel Jan 29, 2025
4 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.

5 participants