[MITgcm-devel] exf_readparms: EXF_NML_04

[Martin Losch]

Hi Jean-Michel,

currently your expectation would not be met by the code for ICEFRONT nor OBCS.

USE_EXF_INTERPOLATION does not have run time parameter, so that's different anyway.

I did not mean to suggest to include all sorts of namelists into our verification/*/input*/data.exf 
I was thinking about my runs where I want to compare with and without USE_EXF_INTERPOLATION and still use similar data.exf (with EXF_NML_04). Currently, that's not possible (and maybe not so important, either).

I can try to change exf_readparms.F to be a little more consistent and we can see how it goes?

Martin

On Jul 27, 2011, at 3:53 PM, Jean-Michel Campin wrote:

> Hi Martin,
> 
> I think there is not yet a well defined rule regarding those optional
> namelists.
> But I would prefer (and would expect) to get the same behavior with
> 1) with #undef ALLOW_ICEFRONT
> and 
> 2) with useICEFRONT=.FALSE. and with #defined ALLOW_ICEFRONT
> same with OBCS (but does this apply to USE_EXF_INTERPOLATION too ?)
> 
> Otherwise, I don't know if it will be a good idea to add in our 
> verification/*/input*/data.exf
> all the potential namelist (even if they are not read, it will not cause
> problems) so that in case we add a pkg/option, will still be able to read
> data.exf
> This is what I would favor regarding data.gmredi, but don't know about 
> data.exf
> 
> Cheers,
> Jean-Michel
> 
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 12:12:04PM +0200, Martin Losch wrote:
>> Dear EXF'lers and other namelisters,
>> 
>> do we have a general policy for "optional" namelists? For example, the namelist EXF_NML_04 is pretty empty) when USE_EXF_INTERPOLATION is undefined (it contains only idummy, and that is probably the case only because you cannot have empty namelists?). Still it is read. The next namelist (EXF_NML_SGRUNOFF) is alway defined, but only read when ALLOW_ICEFRONT is defined, the same is true for EXF_NML_OBCS.
>> 
>> Wouldn't it make sense to define and read these namelists, only when the appropriate CPP flags are set? As far as I know it doesn't matter to have extra namelists in a file, that are not read, but it does matter when a namelist is read that contains entries that are not defined (as currently possible with EXF_NML_04).
>> 
>> What do you think about this?
>> 
>> Martin
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> MITgcm-devel mailing list
>> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
>> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MITgcm-devel mailing list
> MITgcm-devel at mitgcm.org
> http://mitgcm.org/mailman/listinfo/mitgcm-devel