Remove unit error safe #4040
Merged
Remove unit error safe #4040
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This is related to modelica#3881 These changes are completely safe.
Adding a protected element in an example model should be ok.
HansOlsson
added
bug
beutlich
added
L: Magnetic.FundamentalWave
christiankral
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2022
Contributor
christiankral
left a comment
christiankral
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good from my side
christiankral
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2022
Contributor
christiankral
left a comment
christiankral
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To explicitely add this to the review: I prefer #4041 over this PR
AHaumer
approved these changes
Nov 21, 2022
Contributor
Author
|
Merged as part of #4041 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is related to #3881
I strongly believe that both this and and #3881 should be back-ported to maintenance-branch.
These changes don't impact the simulation results and the first is 100% safe, the second is safe as long as people don't extend from an utility-model in an Example-package and add the same declaration.