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

Fix disaggregation scripts to be used with 67k input #613

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 16, 2023

Conversation

k4rst3ns
Copy link
Member

@k4rst3ns k4rst3ns commented Nov 15, 2023

🐦 Description of this PR 🐦

  • Due to set name issues the disaggregation.R and the disaggregation_LUH2.R had to be adjusted to work with the new 'x.y.iso' naming. The fixes are not backward compatible, so most likely this version will not work with 59k input anymore.

🔧 Checklist for PR creator 🔧

  • Label pull request from the label list.

    • Low risk: Simple bugfixes (missing files, updated documentation, typos) or changes in start or output scripts
  • Self-review own code

    • No hard coded numbers and cluster/country/region names.
    • The new code doesn't contain declared but unused parameters or variables.
    • magpie4 R library has been updated accordingly and backwards compatible where necessary.
    • scenario_config.csv has been updated accordingly (important if default.cfg has been updated)
  • Document changes

    • Add changes to CHANGELOG.md
    • Where relevant, put In-code documentation comments
    • Properly address updates in interfaces in the module documentations
    • run goxygen::goxygen() and verify the modified code is properly documented
  • Perform test runs

  • TO BE DONE: check once more that disaggregation and disaggregation_LUH2 is working

📉 Performance changes 📈

  • no need for test runs

🚨 Checklist for reviewer 🚨

  • PR is labeled correctly
  • Code changes look reasonable
    • No hard coded numbers and cluster/country/region names.
    • No unnecessary increase in module interfaces
    • model behavior/performance is satisfactory.
  • Changes are properly documented
    • CHANGELOG is updated correctly
    • Updates in interfaces have been properly addressed in the module documentations
    • In-code documentation looks appropriate
  • content review done (at least 1)
  • RSE review done (at least 1)

Copy link
Contributor

@flohump flohump left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. Thanks for fixing!

@k4rst3ns k4rst3ns merged commit 9d96aee into magpiemodel:develop Nov 16, 2023
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants