Traversal from terminal by depth or breadth first #335
Conversation
This file contains 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
Signed-off-by: Franck LECUYER <[email protected]>
…or messages Signed-off-by: BOUTIER Charly <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: BOUTIER Charly <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: BOUTIER Charly <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: BOUTIER Charly <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: BOUTIER Charly <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: BOUTIER Charly <[email protected]>
Adds equipment information on problematic VSC and Busbar index
jonenst
force-pushed
the
main
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4fcdf56 to
32e5119
Compare
Signed-off-by: FranckLecuyer <[email protected]>
antoinebhs
reviewed
Oct 26, 2023
| result = traverser.traverse(node, null, nextNode); | ||
| } else { | ||
| throw new AssertionError(); | ||
| if (traversalType == TraversalType.DEPTH_FIRST) { // traversal by depth first |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Separate DFS and BFS in two differents methods, otherwise it's a bit difficult to differentiate the recursive DFS with the BFS
| } | ||
| } else { // traversal by breadth first | ||
| boolean keepGoing = true; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we should be able to get rid of the boolean keepGoing, see proposed changes. Instead of encounteredEdges, we could keep track of visitedNodes similarly to the "done" set in the DFS implementation. See suggestion
| LinkedList<Integer> vertexToTraverse = new LinkedList<>(); | ||
| vertexToTraverse.offer(node); | ||
| while (!vertexToTraverse.isEmpty()) { | ||
| int firstV = vertexToTraverse.getFirst(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
rename to currentNode?
| vertexToTraverse.offer(node); | ||
| while (!vertexToTraverse.isEmpty()) { | ||
| int firstV = vertexToTraverse.getFirst(); | ||
| vertexToTraverse.poll(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can be one line int firstV = vertexToTraverse.poll(); ?
| if (done.contains(firstV)) { | ||
| continue; | ||
| } | ||
| done.add(firstV); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We don't need done here as we have the encounteredEdges Set. we need to choose one or the other
| NodeBreakerBiConnectable biConnectable = edge.getBiConnectable(); | ||
| int node1 = biConnectable.getNode1(); | ||
| int node2 = biConnectable.getNode2(); | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can also use int nextNode similarly to the DFS to avoid the following if clause duplicated
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| return keepGoing; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something like this seems to work for me on tests but I haven't tested on a real network only on the tests implemented.
boolean traverseFromNode(int node, TraversalType traversalType, VoltageLevel.NodeBreakerView.TopologyTraverser traverser) {
Graph<Integer, Edge> graph = NodeBreakerTopology.INSTANCE.buildGraph(index, getVoltageLevelResource(), true, true);
if (traversalType == TraversalType.DEPTH_FIRST) {
Set<Integer> visitedNodes = new HashSet<>();
return traverseFromNodeDFS(graph, node, traverser, visitedNodes);
} else {
return traverseFromNodeBFS(graph, node, traverser);
}
}
private boolean traverseFromNodeBFS(Graph<Integer, Edge> graph, int node, TopologyTraverser traverser) {
Set<Integer> visitedNodes = new HashSet<>();
LinkedList<Integer> nodeQueue = new LinkedList<>();
nodeQueue.offer(node);
while (!nodeQueue.isEmpty()) {
int currentNode = nodeQueue.poll();
for (Edge edge : graph.edgesOf(currentNode)) {
NodeBreakerBiConnectable biConnectable = edge.getBiConnectable();
int nextNode = biConnectable.getNode1() == currentNode ? biConnectable.getNode2() : biConnectable.getNode1();
if (visitedNodes.contains(nextNode)) {
continue;
}
visitedNodes.add(nextNode);
TraverseResult traverserResult;
if (biConnectable instanceof SwitchAttributes) {
traverserResult = traverseSwitch(traverser, biConnectable, currentNode, nextNode);
} else if (biConnectable instanceof InternalConnectionAttributes) {
traverserResult = traverser.traverse(currentNode, null, nextNode);
} else {
throw new AssertionError();
}
if (traverserResult == TraverseResult.CONTINUE) {
nodeQueue.offer(nextNode);
} else if (traverserResult == TraverseResult.TERMINATE_TRAVERSER) {
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
private boolean traverseFromNodeDFS(Graph<Integer, Edge> graph, int node,
TopologyTraverser traverser, Set<Integer> visitedNodes) {
if (visitedNodes.contains(node)) {
return true;
}
visitedNodes.add(node);
for (Edge edge : graph.edgesOf(node)) {
NodeBreakerBiConnectable biConnectable = edge.getBiConnectable();
int nextNode = biConnectable.getNode1() == node ? biConnectable.getNode2() : biConnectable.getNode1();
TraverseResult result;
if (visitedNodes.contains(nextNode)) {
continue;
}
if (biConnectable instanceof SwitchAttributes) {
result = traverseSwitch(traverser, biConnectable, node, nextNode);
} else if (biConnectable instanceof InternalConnectionAttributes) {
result = traverser.traverse(node, null, nextNode);
} else {
throw new AssertionError();
}
if (result == TraverseResult.CONTINUE) {
if (!traverseFromNodeDFS(graph, nextNode, traverser, visitedNodes)) {
return false;
}
} else if (result == TraverseResult.TERMINATE_TRAVERSER) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem?
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Feature
What is the current behavior?
The traversal from a terminal is only done by depth first
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
The traversal from a terminal can now be done by depth or breadth first
Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API?
Other information:
Waiting for PR : powsybl/powsybl-core#2626
Waiting for next powsybl-core release