Implement solver_infinity for XPRESS and make it available in Java

[pet-mit]

• Implement solver_infinity for XPRESS and make it available in Java
• Add a non-regression test for this reacent bug fix: Fix xpress range constraint extraction #4214

[lperron]

why not use Double.PositiveInfinity ?

[pet-mit]

why not use Double.PositiveInfinity ?

That's a good point. I guess we thought that using solver_infinity() (since it's in the OR-Tools & solvers' APIs) would be more robust.

[lperron]

It was an oversight on my part. They both return double +inf. Laurent Perron | Operations Research | ***@***.*** | (33) 1 42 68 53 00 Le lun. 15 juil. 2024 à 17:00, Peter Mitri ***@***.***> a écrit :

…

why not use Double.PositiveInfinity ? That's a good point. I guess we thought that using solver_infinity() (since it's in the OR-Tools & solvers' APIs) would be more robust. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#4313 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACUPL3P3CKZ3TTRQMUTE3NDZMPPXRAVCNFSM6AAAAABK4OFCFOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMRYG4YTCMZUG4> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[pet-mit]

It was an oversight on my part. They both return double +inf. Laurent Perron | Operations Research | @.*** | (33) 1 42 68 53 00 Le lun. 15 juil. 2024 à 17:00, Peter Mitri @.> a écrit :
…
why not use Double.PositiveInfinity ? That's a good point. I guess we thought that using solver_infinity() (since it's in the OR-Tools & solvers' APIs) would be more robust. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#4313 (comment)>, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACUPL3P3CKZ3TTRQMUTE3NDZMPPXRAVCNFSM6AAAAABK4OFCFOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEMRYG4YTCMZUG4 . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: @.>

so you think we should ignore these methods, and instead use Double.POSITIVE_INFINITY in our Java code?