NJOY2016.66 #226
NJOY2016.66 #226
Conversation
…ve write subroutines from acefc.f90 to common space in anticipation of reuse
…otonuclear blocks
…to feature/pn-iaea
…changes for lang=1
…to feature/pn-iaea
Feature/pn iaea
Fix/moder
Fix/reconr int6
Feature/mixed elastic
| character(8),public::vers='2016.65' | ||
| character(8),public::vday='01Nov21' | ||
| character(8),public::vers='2016.66' | ||
| character(8),public::vday='18Nov21' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this need to be updated due to my slow review?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fortunately, most of this code has been reviewed previously and has ample validation documentation, so my review was mostly a cursory code style review. I left a few comments, but they were minor at best.
I'll click approve now, but I'll also run a few more comparisons in ERRORR before you merge.
| @@ -1080,8 +1161,15 @@ subroutine acephn(nendf,npend,nace,ndir,matd,tempd,iprint,mcnpx,& | |||
| xss(nex+5)=1 | |||
| nex=nex+2+2*2 | |||
| xss(last+2)=nex-dlwp+1 | |||
| ! amass=awr/awi | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you really want this commented code in the codebase?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's in at least 3 places.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm impressed you saw that :-)
I'm still leaving these comments because they represent the formulas for an arbitrary incident particle with a given mass awi. By rearranging and substituting awi = 0, you'll obtain the actual code implemented in these different places. This way, I'll always know where the formulas come from and how they were obtained - which has not been obvious in the past.
Release for NJOY2016.66
This has been under development for over a year - see release notes for more information.