-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
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
Pre-release update and minor fixes #396
Conversation
- Update clone of Test-Results page, add depth=1 - Update documentation of optional arguments - Update interface documentation - Update version
@eclare108213, @dabail10 can you review when you get a chance. would like to merge and then get this into cice to continue pre release testing. 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.
Not sure how we missed the snow-related use statements before, or why the code works without them. Thanks for fixing these and updating documentation, etc.
|
||
* We recommend doing all checks for optional arguments for an interface before returning just for completeness (as shown above) | ||
|
||
* An argcheck parameter will control when to do the checks, 'none', 'first', or 'all' may be possible settings |
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.
Is this argcheck parameter implemented anywhere now?
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.
Not yet, but soon.
For the use statements in snow, I just moved them out of the subroutines to the top of the file, consistent with the rest of Icepack and to make them disappear from the Icepack interface documentation. It's not necessarily an ideal coding standard, but I think it's OK. |
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 for this.
PR checklist
Short (1 sentence) summary of your PR:
Several minor pre-release updates
Developer(s):
apcraig
Suggest PR reviewers from list in the column to the right.
Please copy the PR test results link or provide a summary of testing completed below.
Cheyenne suite passes. (https://github.com/CICE-Consortium/Test-Results/wiki/icepack_by_hash_forks#dff7810461b7ffd0a91d80fcfa5c7874a3112490)
How much do the PR code changes differ from the unmodified code?
Does this PR create or have dependencies on CICE or any other models?
Does this PR add any new test cases?
Is the documentation being updated? ("Documentation" includes information on the wiki or in the .rst files from doc/source/, which are used to create the online technical docs at https://readthedocs.org/projects/cice-consortium-cice/.)
Please provide any additional information or relevant details below:
Update clone of Test-Results page, add depth=1
Update documentation of optional arguments
Update interface documentation
Update version