[MITgcm-devel] Re: special treatment for ECCO_CPPOPTIONS.h

[Ed Hill]

On Sat, 2003-10-11 at 12:16, Dimitris Menemenlis wrote:
> Ed, is ECCO_CPPOPTIONS.h getting special treatment?
> I notice that you have left a "#define INCLUDE_ECCO_PACKAGE"
> in CPP_OPTIONS.h and that you have not changed its name to
> "ECCO_OPTIONS.h"?


Hi Dimitris,

I'm forwarding this message to the MITgcm-devel list since I'd like to
make sure that others have a chance to see this post and, if necessary,
correct me.

As far as I can tell, it looks like you're right that:

  $ROOTDIR/pkg/ecco/ECCO_CPPOPTIONS.h
  $ROOTDIR/model/inc/CPP_OPTIONS.h

didn't get fully cleaned-up by the recent check-ins.  I notice that
there are still some anachronisms such as

  #define INCLUDE_EXTERNAL_FORCING_PACKAGE

in the latter file.

Please understand that the recent (checkpoint51i) changes were *NOT* a
complete cleanup.  They're just first steps towards automating the
package selection process.  We have the new process working for all the
currently "active" tests in the /verification suite.  Since I don't
(yet?) have any tests that use the ECCO package, I'm not able to fix
them.

Could you perhaps give me a test (or tests) that use the ECCO package?

Ed

-- 
Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office:  MIT Dept. of EAPS;  Room 54-1424;  77 Massachusetts Ave.
            Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
email:   eh3 at mit.edu,  ed at eh3.com
URL:     http://web.mit.edu/eh3/
phone:   617-253-0098
fax:     617-253-4464
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mitgcm.org/pipermail/mitgcm-devel/attachments/20031011/8a4b88b1/attachment.sig>