Move code comments to line above to fix source line truncated compiler warning

[NickSzapiro-NOAA]

Description of Changes:

In compiling ufs-weather-model cpld_debug_gfsv17 regression test, there are many warnings in ccpp-physics for warning #5194: Source line truncated. These are all "cosmetic" in the sense that the lines are too long in the comments. Following #319 , the preferred long-term solution is to properly wrap the comments.

These are fixed here by:
find . -name "*.f" -exec sed -i '/^.\{73\}/ s/^\( [^ ].*[^ ]\) *\( !.*\)$/\2\n\1/' {} +

Tests Conducted:

Tests are bit-for-bit
TODO: "See ufs-community/ufs-weather-model#<pr_number>"

Dependencies:

TODO:

• ufs-community/ufs-weather-model/#<pr_number>

Documentation:

N/A

Issue (optional):

#319

Contributors (optional):

If others have contributed to this work aside from the PR author, list them here

[grantfirl]

Thanks, approved. We'll probably try to get this combined with something else, so there shouldn't be a need to open upstream repo PRs. FYI, there will be an effort soon to transition all of these fixed-format F77 files to free-format F90 as well.

[NickSzapiro-NOAA]

Thanks @grantfirl . Free-format seems better than this PR. Would that happen in the next month(s)?

[grantfirl]

Thanks @grantfirl . Free-format seems better than this PR. Would that happen in the next month(s)?

I'm not aware of a timeline. @dustinswales @climbfuji Any thoughts on timeline for the "hackathon"?

[climbfuji]

Thanks @grantfirl . Free-format seems better than this PR. Would that happen in the next month(s)?

I'm not aware of a timeline. @dustinswales @climbfuji Any thoughts on timeline for the "hackathon"?

What we've learned so far from EPIC is that we can have a mini-hackathon end of Februrary/beginning of March.

My original idea was to do the uppercasing of the file endings at that time, but since that's a really small task by itself we could add the fixed -> free form conversion to the hackathon.

[NickSzapiro-NOAA]

Thanks. Would ~ March be an ok timeline for wrapping up compiler warnings for GFS @dpsarmie ?

[dpsarmie]

Thanks. Would ~ March be an ok timeline for wrapping up compiler warnings for GFS @dpsarmie ?

Yes that should be fine. Sooner is always better for testing purposes.
If it doesn't seem like this will get done in the timeframe for any reason, then this PR can get merged into the production branch for v17, correct?

[NickSzapiro-NOAA]

Yes @dpsarmie , this PR is easy to make (or via 1-liner in description)

If I understand, maybe I close this and re-open if timelines change @rhaesung @grantfirl ?

[grantfirl]

Yes @dpsarmie , this PR is easy to make (or via 1-liner in description)

If I understand, maybe I close this and re-open if timelines change @rhaesung @grantfirl ?

I'll leave the decision to keep this PR open up to you. It could also be put into a draft to make it clear that it isn't in the queue if you decide not to merge this now, just in case the hackathon timeline slips.