Move b4step into advanc to solve aux array filling
#303
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
|
This looks fine to me and didn't raise any problems when doing some tests. |
Member
Author
|
Should we merge this before the tests are working? |
Member
Author
|
I rebased off the current master w/ the tests working so will have to figure out what may be going wrong. If worse comes to worse I will just open a new PR with the changes to make sure something didn't get rebased incorrectly. |
Member
Author
|
Found a bug in the 1D, which is now fixed. This should be good to merge. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This moves
b4stepso that it is called beforeqadand gauges are recorded so that theauxarray can be filled properly if needed, e.g. whenauxis time dependent. The bug can be demonstrated by this modifcation. This also fixes a bug in clawpack/geoclaw#653, but that source needs to be modified in a separate PR.FWIW the new tests from #298 pass except for the adjoint tests, which are problematic anyway.