Skip to content
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

Automatically set solver.fwave based on values in Riemann repository. #738

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 5, 2024

Conversation

ketch
Copy link
Member

@ketch ketch commented Dec 2, 2024

Also check if it's set when checking solver validity.

This addresses the first part of #737 and must be used in combination with clawpack/riemann#181, which adds the relevant values to the riemann repo.

Also check if it's set when checking solver validity.
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Dec 2, 2024

Coverage Status

coverage: 26.759% (-19.8%) from 46.556%
when pulling 9266b53 on set_fwave
into 37658ee on master.

@mandli
Copy link
Member

mandli commented Dec 2, 2024

The advection_reaction_2d example is failing for me (as is the shallow sphere example but that I somewhat expect). It is complaining about solver.fwave not being set.

Log from pytest.

@ketch
Copy link
Member Author

ketch commented Dec 2, 2024

The advection_reaction_2d example is failing

Thanks. Yes, now the solver.fwave must be set manually if you're using a Riemann solver not from the riemann repository. In that sense I guess this is a breaking change but it is quite small. We should probably mention it prominently in the next release notes.

I fixed that example by adding a line to set the value correctly. I didn't find any other examples that are affected by this.

@mandli
Copy link
Member

mandli commented Dec 5, 2024

Works for me now!

@mandli mandli merged commit f55b884 into master Dec 5, 2024
0 of 3 checks passed
@mandli mandli deleted the set_fwave branch December 5, 2024 20:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants