Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Sep 24, 2021. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@castelao
Copy link
Contributor

New enthalpy_SSO_0, consistent with the GSW-3.0.5

doctest values came from GSW-Matlab

New enthalpy_SSO_0, consistent with the GSW-3.0.5
Copy link
Member

@ocefpaf ocefpaf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@efiring are you OK merging this or are you committed to the C-wrapped version?

@castelao
Copy link
Contributor Author

@efiring @ocefpaf I have no problem to later replace the functions that I'm submitting by a C-wrapped version, i.e. there is no long term commitment if approve these PRs.

This case specifically doesn't interfere with the existent code, since enthalpy_SSO_0() is a new function, thus is not used in the current code, but only in the 3.0.5 version.

Copy link
Member

@efiring efiring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good, apart from my question about numpydoc. This is also the sort of function that could be added to the C version very easily.

array([ 97.26388583, 486.27439853, 1215.47517122, 2430.24907325,
5827.90879421, 9704.32030926])
Version
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does numpydoc handle this "Version" heading? I don't see it in https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/doc/HOWTO_DOCUMENT.rst.txt#sections.

Copy link
Member

@ocefpaf ocefpaf Mar 13, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would not try to make both version live together in master. We have a release for the old one. If this is the path you guys want to go I'd say remove all the 48 terms parts and start coding the 75 here.

We can create a maintenance branch for the 48 term if too.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good point; I agree, we need separate branches for 48 term (which is matlab v3.04?) and 75-term (matlab v3.05).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I will create the 48 matlab (v3.04) now and we can use master as the latest 75-term. Is that OK?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll review the doc.

I would suggest creating another branch for 75 as well, so I PR into the 75 instead of master during development. Whenever it get consistent, we merge 75 into master. Despite outdated, master (48) is still the stable distro.

@efiring
Copy link
Member

efiring commented Mar 13, 2017 via email

@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Mar 13, 2017

I will create the 48 matlab

Done. See https://github.com/TEOS-10/python-gsw/tree/48-term

I would suggest creating another branch for 75

I'd rather not. All projects I know and contribute use master as the development version. Creating a branch for it leads to confusion, anger, and the dark-side...

@efiring efiring merged commit a09478a into TEOS-10:master Mar 29, 2017
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants