Issue Description
x - a <= 0 and x <= a are the same constraint, but linopy builds them differently in some cases. Subtraction aligns its operands by position when they share a same-size dimension — discarding coordinate labels — whereas the <= constraint operator aligns by label. The two forms disagree whenever the operands' labels are not already in the same order.
Reproducible Example
importpandasaspdimportlinopym=linopy.Model()
x=m.add_variables(coords=[["A1", "A5", "A11", "A100"]], name="x")
coef=pd.Series([100, 1, 5, 11], index=["A100", "A1", "A5", "A11"])
print(x-coef<=0) # [A1]: x[A1] <= 100 <- positional, wrongprint(x<=coef) # [A1]: x[A1] <= 1 <- by label, correct
coef["A1"] is 1, so the correct constraint is x[A1] <= 1. x <= coef produces that; x - coef <= 0 produces x[A1] <= 100 — it paired x[A1] with coef's first entry (A100), ignoring labels. Confirmed on linopy 0.7.0.
Expected Behavior
x - a <= 0 and x <= a are algebraically identical and must build the same constraint — either both align by label, or a label mismatch raises.
Context
Same positional / override-join behaviour as #586 and #670. #586's own snippet (add_constraints(x >= series)) takes the label-aligned path and no longer reproduces, but the bug is alive in arithmetic. The strict-alignment convention in #591 would fix it.
Issue Description
x - a <= 0andx <= aare the same constraint, but linopy builds them differently in some cases. Subtraction aligns its operands by position when they share a same-size dimension — discarding coordinate labels — whereas the<=constraint operator aligns by label. The two forms disagree whenever the operands' labels are not already in the same order.Reproducible Example
coef["A1"]is1, so the correct constraint isx[A1] <= 1.x <= coefproduces that;x - coef <= 0producesx[A1] <= 100— it pairedx[A1]withcoef's first entry (A100), ignoring labels. Confirmed on linopy 0.7.0.Expected Behavior
x - a <= 0andx <= aare algebraically identical and must build the same constraint — either both align by label, or a label mismatch raises.Context
Same positional / override-join behaviour as #586 and #670. #586's own snippet (
add_constraints(x >= series)) takes the label-aligned path and no longer reproduces, but the bug is alive in arithmetic. The strict-alignment convention in #591 would fix it.