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

Test cases have require_initialization set but lack some initial values #99

Closed
jornbr opened this issue Nov 11, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed
Assignees

Comments

@jornbr
Copy link
Contributor

jornbr commented Nov 11, 2022

The current testcases/fabm-ersem-*.yaml files have require_initialization: true as one of their first lines. This tells FABM that all state variables need to be provided with an initial value in the instance-specific "initialization" sections further down. FABM does not currently enforce this, but this will change in the upcoming v1.5. However, in ERSEM's current testcases the initialization information is incomplete, which will cause them to fail with FABM 1.5. For instance, the following are missing from fabm-ersem-15.06-L4-ben-docdyn-iop.yaml:

O3/bioalk
G2/o_deep
ben_nit/G4n

In FABM < 1.5, these are silently initialized to 0, which is likely the desired behaviour here. To support future FABM versions, these initial values can either be added explicitly, or require_initialization can be changed to false. Either change is fully backwards compatible with FABM < 1.5.

If testing with FABM v1.5 is desired: this functionality is currently in FABM branch yaml-settings.

@jornbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

jornbr commented Jul 6, 2023

Just to note that this will become an issue with [the upcoming FABM 2.0 release (see fabm-model/fabm#41), due September. It could be a good idea to drop require_initialization: true from all ERSEM testcases beforehand, perhaps independent of the usual ERSEM release cycle, to avoid users experiencing issues.

@glessin glessin self-assigned this Nov 2, 2023
@wathen
Copy link
Member

wathen commented Nov 10, 2023

Fixed via #115

@wathen wathen closed this as completed Nov 10, 2023
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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants