initialize context and num_acquisitions

[befelix]

Minor change that initializes context and num_acquisitions in __init__. Without this, the following code raises an error about missing variables.

import GPyOpt

def fun(x):
    return x

bounds = [{'name': 'var_1', 'type': 'continuous', 'domain': (-1,1)}]

opt = GPyOpt.methods.BayesianOptimization(fun, bounds)

opt._update_model()
opt._compute_next_evaluations()

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #171 into master will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #171      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   77.06%   77.07%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          92       92              
  Lines        4230     4232       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits         3260     3262       +2     
  Misses        970      970

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
GPyOpt/core/bo.py	57.81% <100%> (+0.4%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 333023b...baf5230. Read the comment docs.

[apaleyes]

These methods are marked private, so no user is supposed to use them directly. Is there a scenario when leaving these variables uninitialized throws an exception while calling public methods?

[befelix]

Not that I'm aware of, but if you want to have a lot of control over what's happening during BO calling the private methods is actually the most convenient way. Besides that it's good practice to initialize all variables in __init__

…

On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, 16:47 Andrei Paleyes, ***@***.***> wrote: These methods are marked private, so no user is supposed to use them directly. Is there a scenario when leaving these variables uninitialized throws an exception while calling public methods? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#171 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABRjKJMCgMtWFL2QQeU2T3TLFQV__hsrks5tf9MGgaJpZM4SrNvA> .

[apaleyes]

Not that I disagree with the actual change, I was wandering more if there is a legit set of steps that you just have chosen not to use here because it was more verbose.

Although generally if a sequence of private method calls leads to an exception I don't see it as a problem, in this case the change makes sense regardless.