Vince Knight

Good idea. Would this have the potential to simplify tests too? For example, to test baulking, start a system with a full set of customers and see that no joins...

Hi @TheoBoucher, at present this isn't implemented in Ciw. It would definitely be a good addition and I suggest we keep this issue up to track it's implementation (perhaps @geraintpalmer...

> * I don't think parallel processing a single run of the simulation would be possible, as the logic is highly sequential. However parallelising the trials can be done, for...

I've opened https://github.com/CiwPython/Ciw/pull/209 with https://ciw--209.org.readthedocs.build/en/209/Guides/parallel_process.html

Perhaps remove the bug label and add a wontfix label?

Yup, but I'd suggest going with a `wontfix` label for now so that this doesn't look like a long standing bug. (If something is an actual bug it implies that...

This can go in the reference part of the new documentation.

> I would suggest Background is more appropriate? Sorry, that's what I meant. :+1: I keep getting the names of @evildmp's quadrants confused.

Remind me @geraintpalmer, is there a purpose to class names? What about not having names at all and instead of dictionaries you'd just have lists? (Essentially the names just become...

I'm not sure I see the improved readability using dictionaries but: > would still be back compatible :+1: (FYI, depending on how it's implemented given that internally lists are in...