Mathieu Besançon

hi @Mizux did you have time to try the fix?

Sure, I'm starting to use it for a small project, I'll PR as soon as I have a self-contained example On Wed, Aug 21, 2019, 18:43 Dawid Ciężarkiewicz wrote: >...

that's very surprising, we didn't modify anything between 10 and 12 that would change this. Did you check that SCIP was properly installed in both cases? It still needs to...

another addition to the List:tm:

there are experiments in the branch concurrent, but I would say SCIP concurrent is very experimental and not polished at the moment, which is why it's not merged yet.

Yes testing on tricky edge cases which we know will kick off one of the heuristics for instance would make sense

So a complete feasibility checker is out of the scope for this package, see https://github.com/joaquimg/FeasibilityOptInterface.jl for that. I think the function we can implement here is ``` function set_member(::AbstractDistance, v::V,...

As a first step, the set membership that you describe definitely does. For the model-level feasibility of a solution, we can implement it with MOI, using `eval_variables`. Fun-fact: this set...

Does fit in the scope of this package, sorry. The function is in MOI.Utilities: https://jump.dev/MathOptInterface.jl/dev/apireference/#MathOptInterface.Utilities.eval_variables Yes that's the `substitute` you have

Not sure if we should close this issue or not yet. Otherwise, I ran into another "numerical inconsistent" issue: The polyhedron is defined as: ```julia HalfSpace([-1.0, -0.0, -0.0, -0.0, -0.0,...