Oscar Dowson

JuMP now supports conic solvers with a quadratic objective. And if the solver doesn't support the objective, it automatically introduces the auxiliary variable, and if the solver doesn't support quadratic...

Which solver? Gurobi? If so: this is expected behavior. In no case is this a bug in PowerModels.jl. It's strictly an issue for whatever solver you are using.

Okay: this is a pretty nuanced discussion point: to what extent should PowerModels change its formulations to support models more closely implemented by the solver, and to what extent should...

I took another look at this to see if Gurobi had changed. It hasn't. While it appears to have support for interval constraints, it actually implements `l

> I wonder what's more effective two inequalities or Gurobi's change in equations... Open question. Presolve probably makes them equivalent.

The downside to making this change is that it makes solvers like Ipopt worse off. I wonder if we need logic to decide which formulation it supports. But then we're...

There are at least 10 instances that could be changed:  Is there any motivation to do only a subset?

> so when they arrive at Gurobi they are compatible with direct mode? They can use something like: ```Julia optimizer = MOI.Bridges.Constraint.SplitInterval{Float64}( Gurobi.Optimizer(), ) model = direct_model(optimizer) ``` but this...

This is getting a little out of hand. `PositiveSemidefiniteConeSquare`, `PositiveSemidefiniteConeTriangle`, `ScaledPositiveSemidefiniteConeTriangle`, `HermitianPositiveSemidefiniteConeTriangle`... Do we really need yet another PSD cone? Why isn't this just a solver enhancement where they detect...

Do you have a numerical example of what the `A` matrix would be? Also, `(y, C) in` isn't going to work because we don't support tuples as arguments.