[WIP] Add unit test to validate the ucte import #26
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
SlimaneAmar
force-pushed
the
ucte_import_validation
branch
from
0ff76df to
d58e078
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR require some modifications in powsybl core (3.9) .
Currently this cannot be merged.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements (please use
'[x]'to check the checkboxes, or submit the PR and then click the checkboxes)Does this PR already have an issue describing the problem ? If so, link to this issue using
'#XXX'and skip the restNo
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
Feature
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
There is no unit test to validate the Ucte import
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
There is a unit test to validate the Ucte import
Does this PR introduce a breaking change or deprecate an API? If yes, check the following:
No
Other information:
(if any of the questions/checkboxes don't apply, please delete them entirely)