Type check all exception arguments in component __call__ implementations

[emma58]

Fixes #2922

Summary/Motivation:

Params and most other numeric- and Boolean-valued components are callable (to get the value), but they did not previously check that the exception argument was in fact a bool. This meant it was easy to make a typo missing a * character and silently rendering part of the expression constant (with the value of a Param, for example). This adds checks in the implementations of __call__ that exception is a bool. I still think we should discuss deprecating call to evaluate entirely, but this is a much less invasive change that will raise an error for many typos that would otherwise create silently wrong models.

Changes proposed in this PR:

• Checks type of exception argument in implementations of __call__
• Adds a test for the common Param-related typo

Legal Acknowledgement

By contributing to this software project, I have read the contribution guide and agree to the following terms and conditions for my contribution:

1. I agree my contributions are submitted under the BSD license.
2. I represent I am authorized to make the contributions and grant the license. If my employer has rights to intellectual property that includes these contributions, I represent that I have received permission to make contributions and grant the required license on behalf of that employer.

[jsiirola]

This is great, but should be promulgated to other expression objects:

./core/base/boolean_var.py
./core/base/constraint.py
./core/base/expression.py
./core/base/logical_constraint.py
./core/base/matrix_constraint.py
./core/base/objective.py
./core/base/param.py
./core/base/units_container.py
./core/base/var.py
./core/expr/base.py
./core/expr/boolean_value.py
./core/expr/numvalue.py
./core/expr/template_expr.py
./core/kernel/conic.py
./core/kernel/constraint.py
./core/kernel/expression.py
./core/kernel/matrix_constraint.py
./core/kernel/parameter.py
./core/kernel/variable.py
./repn/beta/matrix.py

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 97.75281% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 88.71%. Comparing base (6e71dec) to head (70cc92f).
Report is 47 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pyomo/core/base/logical_constraint.py	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️
pyomo/core/expr/numvalue.py	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3538   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.70%   88.71%           
=======================================
  Files         888      888           
  Lines      101963   102017   +54     
=======================================
+ Hits        90445    90502   +57     
+ Misses      11518    11515    -3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
builders	26.57% <71.91%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
default	84.82% <97.75%> (?)
expensive	33.96% <79.77%> (?)
linux	86.17% <97.75%> (-2.28%)	⬇️
linux_other	86.17% <97.75%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
osx	76.09% <97.75%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
win	84.67% <97.75%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
win_other	84.67% <97.75%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[emma58]

@jsiirola this is ready for another review.