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

Add visualization graph #39

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 27, 2024
Merged

Add visualization graph #39

merged 4 commits into from
Nov 27, 2024

Conversation

leclairm
Copy link
Contributor

@leclairm leclairm commented Nov 15, 2024

Generate an svg graph from the core IR using pygraphviz and adding some interactivity with javascript

NOTE: This requires graphviz to be installed locally

Generate an svg graph from the core IR using pygraphviz and adding some interactivity with javascript
@leclairm leclairm mentioned this pull request Nov 15, 2024
@leclairm leclairm linked an issue Nov 15, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
It doesn't contain any piece of logic or code we now have in core.py or
vizgraph.py
@leclairm leclairm requested review from GeigerJ2 and DropD November 15, 2024 11:48
Copy link
Collaborator

@DropD DropD left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

While testing it locally with the "small" example configuration, I noticed that the "icon_input" node in the visualization is not connected to anything. Is that supposed to be the case?

src/sirocco/svg-interactive-script.js Show resolved Hide resolved
src/sirocco/svg-interactive-script.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/sirocco/svg-interactive-style.css Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since I take it that this is heavily based on https://github.com/BartBrood/Interactive-Graphviz-Diagrams, it would be fair to honor it's MIT license: https://github.com/BartBrood/Interactive-Graphviz-Diagrams/blob/main/LICENSE and include the copyright at the beginning of this file (and probably the CSS file as well?).

Might also be not too early now to think about what license the rest of this code should have.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not heavily based it's 99% copied! I didn't see there was a license. Yes I should absolutely include that.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh it's actually brand new. When I "stole" it, it was only one file in the repo. There might be even more to borrow and acknowledge, then.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@leclairm leclairm Nov 15, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might also be not too early now to think about what license the rest of this code should have.

True, I'm happy to receive any input for that, I'm not really used to it.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I created issue #41 to add a license for the project.

@leclairm
Copy link
Contributor Author

While testing it locally with the "small" example configuration, I noticed that the "icon_input" node in the visualization is not connected to anything. Is that supposed to be the case?

True, I always only look at the large one. It shows the visualization is good check to have! We probably need a PR to well define which scenarios we want to test.

@leclairm
Copy link
Contributor Author

leclairm commented Nov 18, 2024

True, I always only look at the large one. It shows the visualization is good check to have! We probably need a PR to well define which scenarios we want to test.

This makes me realize we don't have a way to express that ICON can use some initial condition data only for the first cycle. It's the same issue as ignoring input data that falls outside of the target data date range: we're missing a way to express when the input data specification should be taken into account. This is now the topic of issue #40

@leclairm leclairm mentioned this pull request Nov 26, 2024
4 tasks
@leclairm leclairm merged commit 8840970 into main Nov 27, 2024
3 checks passed
@leclairm leclairm deleted the vizgraph branch November 27, 2024 10:50
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.

Remove Parcer_PoC
2 participants