-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 57
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update testlist for derecho and fix a few problems #523
base: cesm-coupling
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
…upling and curDatetime wasn't sent in
Hi @ekluzek, thanks for finishing derecho test case and fixing the rpointer file I/O (which looks good to me). I will look over the rest, and merge it (unless I have any question). There is a label WIP[do not merge]. is this supposed to be removed now? |
Let me run the full test list first. And there is still one more task to do on this PR. Then I'll remove the WIP label and have you merge it. I also want to have us make a tag with it as soon as we run the test list. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi Erik, I started looking at this. I don't have anything I noticed, except one inline comment on opnfil
subroutine
@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ subroutine opnfil (locfn, iun, form) | |||
! !ARGUMENTS: | |||
implicit none | |||
character(len=*), intent(in):: locfn !file name | |||
integer, intent(in):: iun !fortran unit number | |||
integer :: iun !fortran unit number |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is this supposed to be input intent?? or inout??
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems to need to be inout, so I removed the intent. But, I could be explicit to say
integer, intent(inout):: iun
if you prefer. That might be better because it means the intent was thought about.
And actually, maybe what it should be is: intent(out), since that's the way it's really working. So I'll try that...
Update the testlist to work on Derecho, and fix some miscellaneous problems.
Fixes #520
Fixes #465
Fixes #417
Fixes #516
Fixes #519
Fixes #512 << still do