cplex - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by tom halliburton / corp / enron on 05 / 25 / 2000
09 : 05 am - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
chonawee supatgiat
05 / 22 / 2000 11 : 56 am
to : grant masson / hou / ect @ ect , pinnamaneni krishnarao / hou / ect @ ect , tom
halliburton / corp / enron @ enron
cc :
subject : cplex
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - forwarded by chonawee supatgiat / corp / enron on
05 / 22 / 2000 11 : 55 am - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
from : samer takriti @ enron communications on 05 / 22 / 2000 11 : 46 am
to : stinson gibner / hou / ect @ ect
cc : chonawee supatgiat / corp / enron @ enron , ravi thuraisingham / enron
communications @ enron communications
subject : cplex
stinson ,
krishna mentioned that tom wants to buy ( may have bought ) xpress . tom ' s
argument is that xpress ' s language allows the user to express special ordered
sets ( certain types of constraints ) in a convenient fashion . chonawee and i
just talked to two of cplex ' s consultants ( whom i know personally ) . they both
mentioned that these sets are recognized and handled implicitly within cplex .
as a result , there is no need for their modeling language to express these
constraints explicitly .
as a result , i feel that we should go with cplex . both chonawee and krishna
seem to have the same impression . i need to get a final vote on this one so
that we can order the licenses . this has been dragging on for too long .
- samer
[ chonawee , my address book does not recognize ena users . please forward to
grant , krishna , and tom ]