Pull request for #144: Do gslab_python side of MG review for 4.1.0

arosenbe commented 6 years ago

@stanfordquan can you review my work from #144 (tandem to gslab-econ/template#96). The main purpose over here is to give a unified method for handling user-(un)specified executables in the builders and prerequisite checks. Thus the main changes are

A new misc. function for returning user specified and default executables.
An abstract class for the builders so that executables can be handled in a unified framework.
Prerequisite checks based on the output from the misc. executable-getting function.

Let me know if you have any questions or want me to walk anything back.

arosenbe commented 6 years ago

Thanks @stanfordquan! I think I responded to all your comments, and I've tested the builders at the template again. Let me know if there's anything else.

qlquanle commented 6 years ago

No remaining issue here. If we agree in the template PR I'm fine with pulling in.

gslab-econ / gslab_python

Pull request for #144: Do gslab_python side of MG review for 4.1.0 #145