[Mitgcm-support] Re: c40 dynamics.patch

[mitgcm-support at dev.mitgcm.org]

Chris Hill wrote:
> Any reason not to always split the bi,bj loop?
> Otherwise all the cs cases need a dynamics.patch
> file.


Infact yes - I wanted to do it by splitting into two separate
routines. It means that do_the_fields_blocking_whatever()
will no longer do a T,S exchange. I was going to do this
when Patrick and I sort through the_main_loop() and clean
up.

A.

PS> At the rate Patrick going he'll catch up before we tag c40.
I expect Wednesday we'll have c40 adjointed, split and tagged but
not AIM threaded ;^)