Closed jmccreight closed 5 years ago
I kept joe's old routine as it was used in testing (both in this repo and in the model repo).
I've added a new, better approach but have not reconciled it with the new one. I have not added tests for it. I'm open to creative ideas here...
I'm going to improve the ensemble/dart collect and then get more serious about merging this PR.
The DART dataset merge is now available and working great.
We could have a philosophical debate about if these routines belong in wrf_hydro_py unless we are specifically using them with the API. I'm guessing we eventually will. I would also argue that they are so important that they should be included regardless.
For the moment there are no tests for these collects. I feel OK about that until we do start using them with the API.
Also, the open_nwm_dataset, open_dart_dataset, and open_wh_dataset should be not too difficult to combine and thereby achieve significant reduction in code through reuse.
I would like to merge these and work towards combining and use with the API supported by testing over the next few months. Does that seem acceptable?
I'd hoped to fix those docstrings, I will try to get that done soon. Like I said, until we use it in the API I'm fine not testing it. I did write some tests for translating NWM forcing to LDASIN forcing that actually pull operational data (names) and work on those. We could do something similar for testing the open_nwm_dataset. Though the band width might be too much. Maybe we should generate dummy data in the test and merge it.
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 337
💛 - Coveralls