[MITgcm-devel] useMNC not in PARAMS.h ?

[Chris Hill]

Hi Jean-Michel,

 You are right useXXX flags should _not_ be in a package specific header
file. It looks like it should work if it is changed and that the current
setup is just an oversight - Ed?
 
 In the doc session this week we should include reviewing and updating
"package" guidelines to make sure the instructions and rules are clear -
some of the stuff is still buried in the initial text notes on packages I
wrote years ago and probably some stuff may either be confusing or missing.

Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mitgcm-devel-bounces at mitgcm.org 
> [mailto:mitgcm-devel-bounces at mitgcm.org] On Behalf Of 
> Jean-Michel Campin
> Sent: Saturday, October 09, 2004 7:11 PM
> To: MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> Subject: [MITgcm-devel] useMNC not in PARAMS.h ?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I don't understand why useMNC is not like all the other pkg 
> On/Off flag, sitting in PARAMS.h
> 
> I found this annoying, for 2 reasons:
> 
> 1) I want to compile mnc pkg, and decide not to use it 
> (useMNC=F), but get stuck in land_readparams because of 
> land_mnc_init ...
> > PID.TID 0000.0001) *** ERROR *** MNC_GET_NEXT_EMPTY_IND: array size
> >    1000 exceeded--try increasing MNC_MAX_ID
> I cannot simply put a IF (useMNC) in front of the call, in 
> land_readparams.F, because useMNC is not where it should be 
> (in PARAMS.h), but in MNC_PARAMS.h (in pkg/mnc) and I don't 
> want to include this file in land_readparams.F with those ugly #ifdef.
> 
> 2) I spend sometime to make the different packages working in 
> a a similar manner (I remember this packages_write_pickup 
> stuff), and now have the impression that this is completely 
> useless if the goal is to make things the less standard as possible. 
> 
> Jean-Michel
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://dev.mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
>