-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Update standard and function names plus major code clean-up #67
Conversation
…composition dependent (Github issue ESCOMP#22).
…me missed kessler variables.
… to improve scheme name accuracy.
… of dry air gas constant
…condensed_water'.
…or Kessler, and fix stdname bug.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good (and like a lot of work!) to me!
Thank you!
@PeterHjortLauritzen I mostly just requested your review here to see if the updated standard names and physics routine names sound reasonable to you. However if you end up not having the time to review then just let me know and I'll take you off the review list. Thanks! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks great. Thanks Jesse ... just have one question (see comment for specific code section)
@@ -187,20 +124,20 @@ subroutine wet_to_dry_water_vapor_run(ncol, nz, pdel, pdeldry, qv, qv_dry, & | |||
|
|||
integer, intent(in) :: ncol |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The conversion from wet to dry and dry to wet mixing ratios is general. I am curious why there are separate calls for water vapor, rain, etc. to convert from wet to dry. Could we use a generic subroutine instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We currently have these separate calls for legacy reasons, i.e. we had converted Kessler before we had any general way to deal with constituents in the framework.
However, I agree that we should have generic wet <-> dry conversion routines, and now that we have a constituents object that should be doable. I can make an issue about it so that we remember to tackle it at some point in the future.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just created the issue, which can be found here: #68
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
review of ChangeLog and standard names. Stiil need to review code
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Minor comment for code. This completes my review of the Fortran
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me! Great work @nusbaume!
Merge pull request ESCOMP#67 from nusbaume/updated_standard_names
The main purpose of this PR is to update the CCPP standard names to match the internal AMP agreed-upon names, as well as rename some of the physics routines to make them less ambigious and more accurate. Along with these changes, significant code cleanup was performed along with some minor bug fixes, with the goal being to produce bit-for-bit results using the same repo version in both CAM and CAM-SIMA.
Fixes #60
Fixes #61
Fixes #62
Fixes #64