Well, you still write code. The difference is the code is written either in ordinary Python or Java and not as mathematical equations.
For example, to do the "Some employees are qualified to do either role, but others can only be a cashier, or a restocker." constraint in the article, it would be written like this:
def required_skill(constraint_factory: ConstraintFactory):
return (constraint_factory.for_each(Shift)
.filter(lambda shift: shift.required_skill not in shift.employee.skills)
.penalize(HardSoftScore.ONE_HARD)
.as_constraint("Missing required skill")
)
We aim to treat Python as a first-class citizen (while keeping it maintainable). For instance, many of the Java methods are mapped to properties on the Python classes with more Pythonic names (see `ScoreExplanation` for an example).
I suspect what gives the Java smell is probably the `SolverFactory`/`SolverConfig`, which is a lot of boilerplate code. A lot of the code can be generated, although we would need to design an API for that.
The fluent (method chaining) API might also be giving the Java smell; I don't see many fluent API being used in Python. In particular, needing to either end lines with `\` or surround the statement with brackets make long fluent chains annoying to use. This is harder to change, since there is no Pythonic alternative that I know of for method chaining.
Langchain did something overloading the | or operator in their LCEL DSL to form LLM pipelines. It feels like abusing python but it's familiar enough as a Unix syntax
For example, to do the "Some employees are qualified to do either role, but others can only be a cashier, or a restocker." constraint in the article, it would be written like this:
Some examples taken from Timefold quickstarts:- Employee scheduling (https://github.com/TimefoldAI/timefold-quickstarts/tree/stab...)
- Vehicle routing (https://github.com/TimefoldAI/timefold-quickstarts/tree/stab...)
- School timetabling (https://github.com/TimefoldAI/timefold-quickstarts/tree/stab...)