You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This commit changed the definition of the TABDIMS keyword (seems like it might have been defined incorrectly prior to this commit). In the commit, the item NUM_STATE_EQ was removed, resulting in some keywords that referred to this item now being ill-defined. Searching for NUM_STATE_EQ still gives several results in the code base: https://github.com/OPM/opm-common/search?q=NUM_STATE_EQ
I would assume that the fix in most cases would be to replace NUM_STATE_EQ with NUM_EOS_RES, but that is mainly based on the fact that NUM_EOS_RES now refers to the same item index as NUM_STATE_EQ previously did.
Also, all the items after the removed NUM_STATE_EQ were moved one step in TABDIMS (which was probably the originally intended correction of TABDIMS), but could maybe a risk that some keywords that refer to these items are now wrong if the item used in the definition of them was based on counting positions in TABDIMS rather than the name of the item.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This commit changed the definition of the
TABDIMS
keyword (seems like it might have been defined incorrectly prior to this commit). In the commit, the itemNUM_STATE_EQ
was removed, resulting in some keywords that referred to this item now being ill-defined. Searching forNUM_STATE_EQ
still gives several results in the code base:https://github.com/OPM/opm-common/search?q=NUM_STATE_EQ
I would assume that the fix in most cases would be to replace
NUM_STATE_EQ
withNUM_EOS_RES
, but that is mainly based on the fact thatNUM_EOS_RES
now refers to the same item index asNUM_STATE_EQ
previously did.Also, all the items after the removed
NUM_STATE_EQ
were moved one step inTABDIMS
(which was probably the originally intended correction ofTABDIMS
), but could maybe a risk that some keywords that refer to these items are now wrong if the item used in the definition of them was based on counting positions inTABDIMS
rather than the name of the item.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: