-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Several issues when doing copy.deepcopy
on a parsed PDDL problem
#613
Comments
Oh, and here are the attached example files for you to reproduce if you'd like. |
Hello @scastro-bdai! Thanks for opening the issue and for using the At the moment the |
Thank you @alvalentini -- I did not notice that method. Just tested and indeed it seems to work for me perfectly. Not sure if you'd still like to keep this issue open or closed, as there is a viable workaround... maybe a good solution would be documenting this workflow somewhere through an example that loads a PDDL domain and plans multiple times over different problem specifications? |
It is a good idea, thanks! |
Actually, here we have a similar example. |
Yep, that's exactly what I am doing! If I had read that example I would have been all set. Maybe it's just good that we have this issue so people who similarly try to |
Describe the bug
I have a use case in which I want to parse a PDDL domain file without a problem file, and I will be adding the problem information (object, initial conditions, and goals) at runtime programmatically.
While this works, I was relying on doing the parsing only once and every time I plan, I "deep copy" the incomplete problem and make my modifications before planning. In doing so, I discovered a whole range of issues that I wanted to share with the authors here.
To Reproduce
I have attached the complete files, but here is the general gist. We first parse the domain, no problem.
Now we'll make a deepcopy
ISSUE 1: When you create a new object using a user type from the copied problem, the environment doesn't cleanly copy over.
This can be worked around by using the third argument:
ISSUE 2: When adding a negated goal, you get an error. For example:
I found I could try get around this with ugly internal syntax... but that led me into another error
ISSUE 3: This is directly related to the above issue. If additionally to goals, you already have an action with a precondition/effect that is similarly negated, that will come up regardless when running the planner.
Expected behavior
Problem modification and planning should still work if the
Problem
object is deep copied.Desktop (please complete the following information):
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: