Move phen_variable to casa_variable #675
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…com:CABLE-LSM/CABLE into 674-merge-phenology-type-into-casa-variable
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
CABLE
Thank you for submitting a pull request to the CABLE Project.
Description
Moves the
phenvariablederived type to thesrc/science/casa-cnp/casa_variable.F90file, and moves the allocation of said variable to the corresponding routine incasa_variable.F90. There was only one instance where the allocations were not paired, which was inload_parametersincable_input.F90, and the cost of these extra allocations in a niche setup (when would we be writing the CASA dump withicycle=0?) is negligible.There are a couple of changes in UM7 that would have to come with this change. See the draft PR in UM7.
Fixes #674
Type of change
Checklist
Testing
Are the changes bitwise-compatible with the main branch? If working on an optional feature, are the results bitwise-compatible when this feature is off? If yes, copy benchcab output showing successful completion of the bitwise compatibility tests or equivalent results below this line.
Are the changes non bitwise-compatible with the main branch because of a bug fix or a feature being newly implemented or improved? If yes, add the link to the modelevaluation.org analysis versus the main branch or equivalent results below this line.
Please add a reviewer when ready for review.
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cable--675.org.readthedocs.build/en/675/