You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now it seems to be considered to be a valve, different from a pipe. Result is that when you change a pipe to a check valve, then it gets confusing about whether that's really a different type of object, and existing data connections can be severed. For example a valve can accept a setting, but that doesn't apply logically to a check valve, so its more like a pipe in that case. however it's useful to keep track of check valves, different from pipes. So no change should be made to harm our ability to do that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Right now it seems to be considered to be a valve, different from a pipe. Result is that when you change a pipe to a check valve, then it gets confusing about whether that's really a different type of object, and existing data connections can be severed. For example a valve can accept a setting, but that doesn't apply logically to a check valve, so its more like a pipe in that case. however it's useful to keep track of check valves, different from pipes. So no change should be made to harm our ability to do that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: