Conversation
|
@K-Leon out of curiosity, where your tests about shipments-only situations or did you also try solving instances mixing shipments and regular jobs? Asking because I've not done much tests so far on the latter. Also some of the last day commits target this use-case through specific local search operators that involve moving around a job and a shipment at once. |
Hi, |
|
@Reggerriee as you can see, this PR has been merged. It's now part of the core features as of v1.6.0. Use |
Unfortunately, I do not know how to use. Can you possibly send an example where two jobs are assigned and which pickup is specified for which delivery? This is my example: Where should I indicate which delivery the pickup belongs to? Thanks for your answer. |
|
Pickup-and-delivery pairs are defined not as jobs, but as shipments. Here is the sample which displays how to build the json : Line 124 in 24a6dd5 you have to specifically define one pickup 'activity' and one delivery 'activity'. |
Thank you for your answer 👍 |
Issue
This PR is a work in progress toward #189 to solve problems including pickup-and-delivery scenarios (with precedence constraints, as opposed to #241 that is already implemented). For all pairs of pickup/delivery jobs, a solution is expected to be valid wrt two new constraints.
Tasks
Add other operator(s) dedicated to P&D?remove_from_routesandtry_job_additionslogic to handle P&D pairs in local searchsteptypeInput::set_compatibilitylibvroomexampledocs/API.mdCHANGELOG.md