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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

ImageData - First step towards central thread variable. #177

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 9, 2020
Merged

ImageData - First step towards central thread variable. #177

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 9, 2020

Conversation

jomey
Copy link
Collaborator

@jomey jomey commented Jul 8, 2020

This is my first hunch. Looking further at the threading logic and consolidate the structure for non- vs distributed execution could simplify a few more pieces. Work in progress.

@jomey
ImageData - First step towards central thread variable.
3d2c9d3 
Define a property to copy the defined base variables on a class. This
is a first step towards identical among inheriting classes. Next is to
add a central initializer to ImageData that all threaded executions use.
@jomey jomey requested a review from scotthavens July 8, 2020 23:33
@scotthavens
Copy link
Contributor

The @property is probably cleaner way to do this. The thread variables are quite a mess at the moment but a lot of that won't be cleaned up until we clean up some of the distribute function calls. For example, precip requires a lot of thread variables even though not all are used. Although cleaning up precip is a whole other beast... which will probably happen once Ernesto precip rescaling is ready to be incorporated.

@jomey
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jomey commented Jul 9, 2020

The failing tests are the same that are failing on the original 18_threading branch. Should we just merge this and take care of those on the original?

@scotthavens
Copy link
Contributor

So merge your branch into 18_threading?

@jomey
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jomey commented Jul 9, 2020

So merge your branch into 18_threading?

Yup, if you are OK with this approach. The target for this PR is set to that. Only need to allow merging with not passed checks somehow

@scotthavens scotthavens merged commit 69c901b into 18_threading Jul 9, 2020
@scotthavens scotthavens deleted the 18_threading_jm branch July 9, 2020 17:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@scotthavens scotthavens Awaiting requested review from scotthavens

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@jomey @scotthavens