-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
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
Confusing radiative transfer control variables #772
Comments
I agree these are confusing. I don't believe any of them can be simply combined (at least not if the old behaviour is desired), because they all control slightly different things. Here's what they actually do and my assessment of name/utility of each:
|
I agree making the names more sensible would go a long way to clarifying the situation, although it is not completely obvious to me there could not be some consolidation. For example, macro_ioniz_mode could be simply a check as to what ionization cycle we are in, and macro simple might be a separate rt_mode. matom_radiation as you say might be tied to spectral cycles explcity, or again could be a rt_mode. If we just change names, these might be possibilities macro_ioniz_mode --> macro_use_estimators All could be answered by True False |
Currently, we use several variables to control radiation transvariables. These include
rt_mode
ioniz_mode
macro_ioniz_mode
macro_simple
matom_radiation
Several of these are just have True or False values, essentially, but the names don't say what this means so one has to go back and look at the definition to find out, or add a comment to explain. It's also not clear that we need this large number of variables. For example, why do we need both an ioniz_mode and a macro_inoniz_mode. We should try to improve this, and possibly combine some variables.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: