Add initial_input to MarketBidCost

[GabrielKS]

Quick and dirty implementation, very much a draft at the moment — I'm not super happy with the now greater asymmetry of this interface (see #1150). Also I haven't done decremental yet — I'll do that once we finalize an interface — and the docs and tests are incomplete. But it is something functional to test with.

Minor potential violation of SemVer: the old MarketBidCost flavor, which lacks an initial_input, still exists, but its initial_input is now set to nothing rather than NaN. This change probably should have been made as soon as we made initial_input nullable.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 83.48624% with 18 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 84.59%. Comparing base (ba1a44d) to head (ee43211).
Report is 20 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/models/cost_function_timeseries.jl	80.68%	17 Missing ⚠️
src/models/cost_functions/MarketBidCost.jl	95.23%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1151      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.61%   84.59%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         181      181              
  Lines        8285     8379      +94     
==========================================
+ Hits         7010     7088      +78     
- Misses       1275     1291      +16     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	84.59% <83.48%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/PowerSystems.jl	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/models/cost_functions/MarketBidCost.jl	88.37% <95.23%> (+3.52%)	⬆️
src/models/cost_function_timeseries.jl	80.00% <80.68%> (+0.83%)	⬆️

[kdayday]

@jd-lara @pesap is there any timeline on this pull request review? Currently we have a failing market bid example in the documentation, but I'm waiting to update if changes are going to happen soon. Thanks!

[pesap]

@jd-lara @pesap is there any timeline on this pull request review? Currently we have a failing market bid example in the documentation, but I'm waiting to update if changes are going to happen soon. Thanks!

I think @rodrigomha is working on this.

[rodrigomha]

We should close #1187 with this PR

[rodrigomha]

There is an issue related with promotion of Int to Float in no_load_cost that should promote:

Got exception outside of a @test
  MethodError: Cannot `convert` an object of type 
    Int64 to an object of type 
    Union{Float64, TimeSeriesKey}
  
  Closest candidates are:
    convert(::Type{T}, !Matched::T) where T
     @ Base Base.jl:84
  
  Stacktrace:
    [1] convert(::Type{Union{Nothing, Float64, TimeSeriesKey}}, x::Int64)
      @ Base ./some.jl:37
    [2] MarketBidCost(no_load_cost::Int64, start_up::@NamedTuple{hot::Float64, warm::Float64, cold::Float64}, shut_down::Float64, incremental_offer_curves::CostCurve{PiecewiseIncrementalCurve}, decremental_offer_curves::Nothing, incremental_initial_input::Nothing, ancillary_service_offers::Vector{Service})

[rodrigomha]

Proposed interface ready for review. Requires NREL-Sienna/PowerSystemCaseBuilder.jl#109 and NREL-Sienna/PowerSystemsTestData#63

[jd-lara]

@rodrigomha the change in ee43211 fixes the backwards compatibility broken by this PR

[jd-lara]

If the tests pass we should merge

[kdayday]

We should close #1187 with this PR

@rodrigomha can you check whether #1187 should be closed?