[MITgcm-devel] Re: CCP_EEOPTIONS

[Alistair Adcroft]

Andy,

Is USE_W2 synonymous with USE_EXCH2 in that if you are using exch2 then
USE_W2 is always defined or doe it do something else?

BTW, after yesterdays discussion, do you know what more mnc might need to do
before you can design a netcdf/mnc version of the tile*.mitgrid files? You
might want to let Ed know if there's a new dimension (face index) required?
It will be more than an attribute and might upset his plans ...

A.
--
Dr Alistair Adcroft            http://www.mit.edu/~adcroft
MIT Climate Modeling Initiative        tel: (617) 253-5938
EAPS 54-1523,  77 Massachusetts Ave,  Cambridge,  MA,  USA

-----Original Message-----
From: mitgcm-devel-bounces at mitgcm.org
[mailto:mitgcm-devel-bounces at mitgcm.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Eichmann
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 10:24 AM
To: MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
Subject: [MITgcm-devel] Re: CCP_EEOPTIONS


* Alistair Adcroft <adcroft at mit.edu> wrote on Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at
09:49:35AM -0500

> As for the CS expts, I did try removing CPP_EEOPTIONS.h from them but
> they broke so I left them in place - I have no idea why they are 
> needed but imagine that exch and exch2 are using the same header files 
> which is quite sensible and forward looking.

A+JM,

They have the line 
#define USE_W2
and exch2 includes some header files that exch does not (and would not).

exch2 is also specified in packages.conf, a redundancy which probably ought
to 
be remedied.  But until exch2 is the only cs exchange option, I think some
cruft is unavoidable.

-AFE

_______________________________________________
MITgcm-devel mailing list
MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org http://dev.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel