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

Duplicate lines of code in BareGroundFluxesMod.F90 #2129

Closed
olyson opened this issue Aug 31, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1861
Closed

Duplicate lines of code in BareGroundFluxesMod.F90 #2129

olyson opened this issue Aug 31, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1861
Assignees
Labels
bfb bit-for-bit code health improving internal code structure to make easier to maintain (sustainability)

Comments

@olyson
Copy link
Contributor

olyson commented Aug 31, 2023

Brief summary of bug

There are 3 duplicate lines of code in BareGroundFluxesMod.F90

General bug information

Lines 302-304 are duplicated in lines 309-311

302 z0mv(p) = 0._r8
303 z0hv(p) = 0._r8
304 z0qv(p) = 0._r8
305 dlrad(p) = 0._r8
306 ulrad(p) = 0._r8
307 dhsdt_canopy(p) = 0._r8
308 eflx_sh_stem(p) = 0._r8
309 z0mv(p) = 0._r8
310 z0hv(p) = 0._r8
311 z0qv(p) = 0._r8

CTSM version you are using: [output of git describe]
ctsm5.1.dev139

Does this bug cause significantly incorrect results in the model's science? No

@olyson olyson added code health improving internal code structure to make easier to maintain (sustainability) tag: simple bfb next this should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting. labels Aug 31, 2023
@wwieder wwieder removed the next this should get some attention in the next week or two. Normally each Thursday SE meeting. label Oct 19, 2023
@wwieder
Copy link
Contributor

wwieder commented Oct 19, 2023

Address in #1861

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bfb bit-for-bit code health improving internal code structure to make easier to maintain (sustainability)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants