Fix missing constraints error

[Bachibouzouk]

Fix #827

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• Loop over the user defined constraints to assign them instead of expecting all possible keys under CONSTRAINTS in dict_values

The following steps were realized, as well (if applies):

• [x] Use in-line comments to explain your code
• [x] Write docstrings to your code (example docstring)
• [ ] For new functionalities: Explain in readthedocs
• [ ] Write test(s) for your new patch of code (pytests, assertion debug messages)
• [x] Update the CHANGELOG.md
• [x] Apply black (black . --exclude docs/)
• [x] Check if benchmark tests pass locally (EXECUTE_TESTS_ON=master pytest)

_{For more information on how to contribute check the CONTRIBUTING.md.}

[smartie2076]

834 changed D2 majorly.

[Bachibouzouk]

I think for the constraints it would make sense not to have constraints, rather than having default values to them.

[Bachibouzouk]

834 changed D2 majorly.

I could reapply my changes on top, the gist of it is to make sure the code runs if the constraints are not defined (also good for back compatibility ;))

[smartie2076]

As you say that this will make sure that MVS stays downward compatible, lets use this PR to evade some issues. I would say that it does not really fix the issue with the parameters, but we have two similar issues anyway (#780 and #827), so one of them can be closed with this.

[Bachibouzouk]

The error (missing Key in the last test of test_D0) originate from a part of code which was in dev, @ciaradunks do you know how it should be fixed?

[smartie2076]

Hi @Bachibouzouk! I think the issue is that now, with your changes, you do your pre-processing with D0.prepare_constraint_minimal_renewable_share() first and then evaluate the constraint. Was this intentional?

Basically, before that the test was able to skip the constraints and run the test on tests/test_data/inputs_for_D0/mvs_config.json. There, energyVector is missing from the evaluated energyProduction consumption source:

So, you can either add an energyVector to this, or you move the check for the value of the constraint before D0.prepare_constraint_minimal_renewable_share(), if that is possible.

This is a reason why I think that D0, D1 would do better if we would not test them with a json file but with input csv files...

[Bachibouzouk]

I think you should rather move the pre-processing into if-loop. It seems that would not cause any problems.

Are you intentionally not writing with functions you changed in the CHANGELOG? Especially that the validity checks are only performed if a constraint is actually added is also useful information.

Not writing the function names in the CHANGELOG was not intentional, merly laziness I would guess, I will update when I fix