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

Created new branch to update matlabtools #88

Open
jloizu opened this issue Jan 29, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

Created new branch to update matlabtools #88

jloizu opened this issue Jan 29, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@jloizu
Copy link
Collaborator

jloizu commented Jan 29, 2020

Antoine and I have created this branch in order to update the matlab routines to the new environment (HDF5 output format). Most of the important changes required for the tools to work on the new versions of SPEC (2.0 or more) are already implemented thanks to Antoine.

I will revise and make minor modifications. Feel free to test and report bugs. Once we are convinced that we have a good working update, we will merge back into master.

@abaillod
Copy link
Collaborator

abaillod commented Sep 9, 2020

Hello there,

@zhisong and I are working on the Zernike branch and we want to update the Matlab tools before preparing the merge into the master branch. @jloizu: Maybe we should merge this matlab_update branch first, so that Zhisong and I work on the updated version of the Matlab tools.

What do you think? Do we still need to do anything on this matlab_update branch before merging into master? If yes, what? I had a few things on my list:

  • Test plot_spec_iota when used on free-boundary cases. Sometimes I got an error
  • Solve bug in plot_spec_Bgrid
  • Extend plot_spec_modB_boundary to slab and cylindrical geometries
  • Use same format in plot_spec_poincare and plot_spec_kam for the toroidal angle input
  • Remove fdata_from_data, gdata_from_data, idata_from_data and read directly from the hdf5 structure
  • Improve documentation
  • Improve tutorial
  • Design tests

@jloizu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jloizu commented Sep 9, 2020

Antoine and Zhisong, great work and already a first congratulations!

@abaillod Regarding the matlab tools, all the check points are very good things to do but we can do that a posteriori, so I would merge as you say the matlab branch, and then, once the zernike branch is merged into master, we can work for a day on the matlab tools to make them more complete. I don't think it is an urgency that should stop you guys from merging.

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

7 participants