Open Teschl opened 3 weeks ago
I like option 1 the best, at least for the 2D versions, which should otherwise have a similar interface. fsm2d
is probably a better default, because it requires less memory and is generally faster.
I might suggest only doing the interface for the 2D versions for now. excesstopography_fmm3d
was made for TTLEM3D, and I'm not sure how much of the landscape evolution modeling stuff we want to provide here at the moment.
Ok, sounds good. Option one with fsm2d
as default it is.
Regarding the threshold_slopes
, how will this be provided? Right now, I have just been using a matrix that is filled with one value (like 0.2). Do we expect the user to provide a matrix?
I was thinking something like this:
excesstopography(0.2)
where the whole threshold_slopes
will be filled with 0.2excesstopography(some_matrix)
where the threshold_slopes
is some_matrixexcesstopography()
where a default threshold_slope
will be usedFor option 2 we might have to implement an easy way to generate the required matrix.
I think all of the above options are reasonable to provide if that's possible. Another option is that you have a GridObject
that contains the threshold_slopes
. This would be similar to option 2, but it might be nicer to call dem.excesstopography(thresholds)
than to have to remember to call dem.excesstopography(thresholds.z)
in that case.
@wkearn We have two options on how to implement this:
excesstopography(method='fsm2d')
I think both are valid options, but I would prefer 1 if one of the algorithms is used more commonly than the others.