[MITgcm-devel] this weeks share of stupid suggestions about netcdf

[Jean-Michel Campin]

Hi Martin,

Sorry not to answer earlier.
I am not sure who received your response (sent on Feb. 3rd)
Here is what I get in the header:
> From: Martin Losch <mlosch at awi-bremerhaven.de>
> Subject: Re: [MITgcm-devel] this weeks share of stupid suggestions about netcdf
> Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 09:04:49 +0100
> To: Jean-Michel Campin <jmc at ocean.mit.edu>
> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2)
Did you sent it to the development list ?

Otherwise, I agree with you. I think it would be nice to have this
missing-value feature. And to be 100% clear, the default could be
"no missing value", and when you specify a missing_value in data.mnc,
then you know what you want, and you get it.
The only question I have for you is: should it be defined one 
per variable ? one per file or per type of output ?

And regarding the other part:
> Ed, for all of this it would be convenient to have a "generic" ...
I fully agree. I also think it would be nice to have a "minimal"
type of mnc write (mainly for debugging) where you just need 1 call 
to write a field. And this goes in the same direction as your suggestion.

Thanks,

Jean-Michel