Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Changed ddt_type metadata keyword to just type. #383

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 30, 2021

Conversation

gold2718
Copy link
Collaborator

Also, added infrastructure and a method to find the intrinsic elements of a compound array or DDT
closes #377

Added infrastructure and a method to find the intrinsic elements of a compound array or DDT
@gold2718 gold2718 added the capgen-unification Issues/PRs necessary for capgen/prebuild unification label Jul 26, 2021
@gold2718 gold2718 added this to the capgen unification milestone Jul 26, 2021
@gold2718 gold2718 requested a review from climbfuji July 26, 2021 16:39
@gold2718 gold2718 self-assigned this Jul 26, 2021
found in this variable (via finding a variable in <check_dict> with
the same standard name).
Currently, an array of DDTs is not processeed (return None) since
Fortran does not support a way to reference those elements.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure of the implication of this, hope we can clarify at the ccpp-framework meeting.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess it depends on whether or not the NOAA models or the SCM will ever need this feature. We generate code to make sure that all input variables in the active physics suite have been initialized. To do this, we need to be able to look into arrays of fields or into DDTs to find fields that could be initialized (2D or 3D physical fields). Is this something you will likely need?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure. Maybe we should look at some specific examples of how the UFS works at the moment in our next developer meeting (or in a separate meeting) to see if this is already an issue or not.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay. You can prepare by answering the question:
At run time, does / will the UFS need to query the standard names used by a suite?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think so. We have never used the standard names at run time (after switching to the static build 2 years ago), only at build time.

@gold2718 gold2718 requested a review from climbfuji July 30, 2021 22:41
@gold2718 gold2718 merged commit da063f9 into NCAR:feature/capgen Jul 30, 2021
@gold2718 gold2718 deleted the capgen branch July 30, 2021 22:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
capgen-unification Issues/PRs necessary for capgen/prebuild unification
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants