One Sim, one Universe: remove multiple Universes functionality about mdsynthesis HOT 15 CLOSED

Moving forward with this one upon release of datreant.core.

from mdsynthesis.

Maybe it makes sense for there to be some sort of unsplittable object (ie how do I clearly know which the smallest matryoshka doll is). How is a nested Sim different from a Group of Sims?

from mdsynthesis.

Sorry @richardjgowers, just now plugging back into every loose thread.

I'm not sure I understand your question. Since Treants can have as much depth as the filesystem supports, this extends to Sims, and I was just noting a usage pattern that could work as an alternative to the "multiple Universes" functionality to be deprecated.

As for Groups, these are basically Treants with a persistent Bundle attached. They don't require "members" to be within their own tree, though that's allowed (and generally more robust when things move).

Does that help?

from mdsynthesis.

I was just thinking there might be value to creating an object (Sim) which is unambiguously singular. So when you hit this point, you know you've reached the end of the rabbit hole.

In terms of semantics, if I've run multiple simulations, I expect to have to use a container (Group?) of Sims.. not a Sim of Sims?

So wrt your diagram up top, I'd expect main_Sim to be a group not a sim.

I'm not sure if this breaks the entire model though, I don't really use MDS in complicated ways!

from mdsynthesis.

@richardjgowers functionally you could do either way. You could use a Group and just keep the related Sims together as members of it, or you could just nest the Sims. The point is that whatever you choose there is an alternative given that we are chopping off existing behavior of individual Sims.

from mdsynthesis.

something something something preferably one and only one way?

from mdsynthesis.

@richardjgowers fair enough. We considered axing Group entirely, but the conclusion there was it gives functionality one can't get with an in-memory aggregation (Bundle) or with nesting Treants. That discussion could be revisited, though, because there might be a better way entirely.

from mdsynthesis.

Sorry, I think I'm just playing devils avocado at this point. I just don't get how a Sim is multiple things, but maybe it makes sense with other data.

from mdsynthesis.

I think support for axing multiple universes is universal.

Like @richardjgowers , I also find it conceptually cleaner to use a Group to perform (close to) the functionality of multiple universes than to nest Sims but this is a second-order question. If we're not 100% sure of the Matroshka-Sims then it might be sufficient for right now simply not to advertise the functionality, just in case we later introduce something that disallows a Sim to contain another Sim.

If this is the last thing between us an a datreant-compatible release of MDSynthesis then I suggest to agree quickly on the course of action.

from mdsynthesis.

P.S.: I understand where @dotsdl is coming from with the hierarchical ordering in the nested Sims but the downside is that users have to think of yet another data structure in addition to Sim, Treant, Bundle, Group --- which is all well for developers but rather confusing for the casual user.

Or in MDS you shield people completely from the datreant stuff.... (which is probably more work and less pay-off for the user in the long term)

from mdsynthesis.

@orbeckst yeah, the delay has been mostly in implementation, which involves ripping things out of the Universes limb and putting them into the top-level namespace. I've started work on this, but haven't finished yet.

The main worry in keeping it is that the json schema is more complicated than it needs to be, so if we're going to break it, it needs to be now.

from mdsynthesis.

Sure, break it now.
And I removed the question mark and the question from the issue ;-)

from mdsynthesis.

@orbeckst the hierarchical ordering is one alternative, but certainly not the only one. Basically, Treants can be nested, and this just works. One could probably use Groups similarly. Depends on individual needs/style; we don't prescribe anything here.

from mdsynthesis.

Aaaaand, they're gone: 7162a99

Need to update docs, then we'll make a release.

from mdsynthesis.

Note: these changes break all Sims you may have been using up until this point. When the dust settles on the release I'll make a conversion script for getting usable Sims back out of existing ones. It should be easier to maintain changes in the future once we have releases to increment them on.

from mdsynthesis.