Expose workflow to extract results from simulation

[FedericoNegri]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #543 (87470d9) into master (6f656d4) will increase coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 91.11%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #543      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.82%   83.86%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files          47       47              
  Lines        5068     5083      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits         4248     4263      +15     
  Misses        820      820              

[PProfizi]

@FedericoNegri why do you need to define the output of the workflow (set_output_name) later and not here?

[FedericoNegri]

@PProfizi In a different context, I'm using the _get_result_workflow function to get the workflow and chain additional operators, for instance:

wf, out = _get_result_workflow(...)

# add min/max filters
min_max_op = simulation._model.operator(name="min_max_fc")
min_max_op.connect(0, out)
wf.add_operator(operator=min_max_op)

# Set the workflow output
wf.set_output_name("min", min_max_op.outputs.field_min)
wf.set_output_name("max", min_max_op.outputs.field_max)

Do you suggest doing differently?

[PProfizi]

@FedericoNegri @cbellot000 I've had the same sort of issues while trying to make dynamic workflows, I think what we need is to add getter to Workflow, such as Workflow.get_output_by_name which returns the input/ouput as a proper Operator.Input or Operator.Output the same way we can set_output_name or set_input_name, otherwise we keep having to pass a variable to not loose it. The alternative is to use Workflow.connect_with where you gather what you want to add in a second worklow. In your case though it may be exactly what you need. This is for example what we do here where we create a mesh extraction workflow which we connect to the result extraction workflow.

[FedericoNegri]

@PProfizi thanks for the feedback. I can try out the connect_with route, but yeah ideally the first approach would be more convenient. Anyways, I've reworked the _get_result_workflow so that now it only returns the workflow. Please have a look.