Clean up process_output#4405
Conversation
timothy-nunn
force-pushed
the
remove-bytes
branch
from
b91d45d to
636aeff
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4405 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 48.64% 48.63% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 151 151
Lines 29673 29670 -3
==========================================
- Hits 14433 14429 -4
- Misses 15240 15241 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
| ovarre(constants.MFILE, descr, varnam, value, output_flag) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def ocosts(file, varnam: str, descr: str, value): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can ocosts be removed too?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You'll notice that ocosts has a different order of arguments so it can be replaced, but not easily. It is also used by some other packages.
| def ovarrf(file, descr: str, varnam: str, value, output_flag: str = ""): | ||
| ovarre(file, descr, varnam, value, output_flag) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Think this needs deleting too (if I try and suggest the change it keeps not working/formatting weirdly so having to comment this!)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like to but need to work with @j-a-foster first to update some external packages that still use ovarrf
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay makes sense! I have made a 'blocked' issue for that #4439 so that can be done at a later date when possible
timothy-nunn
force-pushed
the
remove-bytes
branch
from
c3883da to
a9ab6c8
Compare
3 participants
Remove legacy handling of bytes (required with the Fortran interface)
Update PROCESS to only use
ovarrewhere able to.