Take into account discreteness for no cost zero variables in bounds section

[MaximSmolskiy]

It seems that there was inconsistency in https://github.com/ERGO-Code/HiGHS/blob/master/src/io/HMPSIO.cpp#L879 with https://github.com/ERGO-Code/HiGHS/blob/master/src/io/HMPSIO.cpp#L724-L728

As I understand, for example, https://github.com/ERGO-Code/HiGHS/blob/master/src/io/HMPSIO.cpp#L925-L927 - for no cost zero integer variable with lb = 0 and ub = +inf LI BOUND will be written (unless write_no_cost_zero_columns = false) and then maybe it is worth taking this into account in num_no_cost_zero_columns_in_bounds_section variable and corresponding log

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 79.21%. Comparing base (14e7a68) to head (6c135f9). Report is 220 commits behind head on latest.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
highs/io/HMPSIO.cpp	0.00%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           latest    #2299   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   79.20%   79.21%           
=======================================
  Files         343      343           
  Lines       83866    83857    -9     
=======================================
- Hits        66429    66427    -2     
+ Misses      17437    17430    -7     

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:

• :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[jajhall]

We've not forgotten about this: just rather busy ATM