Closed DesmetQuentin closed 3 months ago
Definitely we have to rename it something else. It was supposed to be a placeholder for anyone wanting to have an entry point at OASIS coupling, and there is actually non need for it in the code (as for BMI, also). 40d51763b
Sorry, some more went into the commit... This is the correct: 9981aee6f9acff687ffdc8e4d9b29b1481648597
Well, off course it also works by deleting it :+1: (I checked compilation, it's alright now) See you later! Quentin
Hi Graziano,
I understand the formalism that made you add the "empty"
mod_oasis
module inmod_oasis.F90
, but it's a problem when compiling with--enable-oasis
because the OASIS library itself is calledmod_oasis
(see import in, e.g.,oasislib/mod_oasis_generic.F90
ormod_oasis_interface.F90
). I don't know how do you plan to maintain yourmod_oasis.F90
on the long term, but I think the name should be changed. In the current set up, the compilation with--enable-oasis
fails when dealing withmod_oasis_interface.F90
because the import I made in it (use mod_oasis
) leads to use themod_oasis.o
andmod_oasis.mod
of RegCM'sMain
, instead of the actual OASIS library.Hope you understand the conflict, Cheers, Quentin