You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It is already possible to save the network state (e.g. using network.save(path) or network.export(path)), however it would also be useful to "just" get the json string representation as opposed to the files, which in turn can be stored in a variable or written to a database.
Ideally, one would then also be able to use the same string representation to reload the state of the network or initialise the solver.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think the separation of reading/writing from the collection of the data is a good idea. I am thinking about a large dictionary with the keys representing the different classes, and not multiple variables. Would that be fine for you?
Thinking more about it, it could actually be kind of beneficial to have just one large .json file for network states or exports... Same for loading it. Then people do not need to deal with multiple files, if they want to deal with the contents separately. On the downside, the contents would then become less humanly readable. Any opinion on this?
It is already possible to save the network state (e.g. using
network.save(path)
ornetwork.export(path)
), however it would also be useful to "just" get the json string representation as opposed to the files, which in turn can be stored in a variable or written to a database.Ideally, one would then also be able to use the same string representation to reload the state of the network or initialise the solver.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: