search

ajdawson / eofs

EOF analysis in Python
http://ajdawson.github.io/eofs/
GNU General Public License v3.0
199 stars 60 forks source link

Metadata-aware solver interface to cf-python fields #118

Closed sadielbartholomew closed 2 years ago

sadielbartholomew commented 4 years ago

Hi, we've had a user feature request to our project cf-python for the ability to conduct EOF & rotated EOF analysis with our intrinsic data object, the cf-python field, or more precisely the 'field construct' of the CF data model (see also the cfdm library).

Bryan Lawrence recommended your library as a potential solution for this, notably since it appears to be open for interfacing in a way that allows for management of the underlying metadata, as demonstrated by the Iris interface module. cf-python makes use of numpy arrays under-the-hood but our philosophy & one of our core USPs is to enable data analysis that preserves CF-compliant metadata, so the standard numpy solver interface is not appropriate.

Therefore we were wondering if you'd be happy to include a module for a cf-python solver interface? If so, we'd write it (I've volunteered so I would write most, if not all, of it) & then I suggest we can put it up as a Pull Request for your review. If that sounds agreeable, please let us know any requirements/advice you might have for us to help us to develop it so it fits in as you would like, otherwise we can use the iris module as a guide. Thanks.

ajdawson commented 2 years ago

I'm going to close this issue now since it has been open for years I suspect it is not relevant at least in its original form. I am in the process of cleaning up this repository but available time for maintenance is short. If this is still a desirable thing to have and someone is available to work on it then please create a new issue.

sadielbartholomew commented 2 years ago

I'm going to close this issue now since it has been open for years I suspect it is not relevant at least in its original form.

Hi @ajdawson, thanks but in fact we would still be interested in your thoughts about this. We were just waiting for a response from you or someone else involved in this project. In hindsight I should have followed up with another comment closer to the time when it became clear there wouldn't be a reply to the opening comment.

If you could, please can you let us know whether or not you might be happy to include a solver interface module as we detail and ask above, bearing in mind in particular that we would write it ourselves so it should be little work for you or others who maintain this library? If the answer is no then this issue can indeed be considered closed as in concluded. Thanks.