Open JosePizarro3 opened 2 months ago
I pushed a branch fixing issue 1. Regarding issue 2, I need some more context: this piece of code was implemented in function of GW, but I'm not sure what purpose it serves. All I can gather is some code dev 6 years ago decided to generate a long-format search string. Typically, functional names are used directly. There's definitely some benefit in searching all functionals that contain a certain percentage of one, but this format isn't very conducive to it. My first thought is to simply remove this.
All boils down to:
I'll merge your fix.
Regarding issue 2, I need some more context: this piece of code was implemented in function of GW, but I'm not sure what purpose it serves.
@JosePizarro3 I was actually directing this question to you, but I should've been a bit more explicit.
From what I gather, you introduced functional_long_name_from_method
in the legacy code, which then got ported over. Could you pls give me some more explanation on its original purpose? That would help with deciding on the next action.
It's of course possible that you moved it over from somewhere else, but the trail ends there.
I am not sure what you meant with "...was implemented in function of GW.". If it is a piece of code old and useless, you are welcome to delete it.
It seems something with the libxc name and the weighting, but my expertise finishes there. I just moved everything to keep consistent about the old normalization.
I am not sure what you meant with "...was implemented in function of GW.". If it is a piece of code old and useless, you are welcome to delete it.
I meant that git traces it back to a commit named "Hotfix GW workflow method section".
It seems something with the libxc name and the weighting, but my expertise finishes there. I just moved everything to keep consistent about the old normalization.
Okay, thank you for clarifying
Matyas Novak from the SPRKKR is trying to write a parser and found some errors. This is the message he sent me:
@ndaelman-hu my guess is that the normalization of the
DFT
andXCFunctional
class is broken. Would you mind taking a look and taking this chance to work on #13 and polishing the DFT schema? It shouldn't be complicated.