Is it because we need to use drive caller in LinearElasticBistop, LinearTimeVariantViscoelasticGeneric and some other places and DriveCaller isn't a subclass of MBEntity yet? If that's the case I'd prefer for this relaxed config to be defined only in classes that need it. I know it feels lime duplication, but this way we show that the class has incomplete validation.
Also, until we rework all drive callers, I think we should describe the type as Union[DriveCaller, DriveCaller2] to allow using the new definitions where available.
I noticed that the
ConstitutiveLawclass has this configuration: https://github.com/Shimul-Baidya/MBDyn/blob/80f359c36febf36195c5d767f7db161aa880a14e/contrib/PythonPreprocessor/MBDynLib.py#L3795-L3796Is it because we need to use drive caller in
LinearElasticBistop,LinearTimeVariantViscoelasticGenericand some other places andDriveCallerisn't a subclass ofMBEntityyet? If that's the case I'd prefer for this relaxed config to be defined only in classes that need it. I know it feels lime duplication, but this way we show that the class has incomplete validation.Also, until we rework all drive callers, I think we should describe the type as
Union[DriveCaller, DriveCaller2]to allow using the new definitions where available.