Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove unnecessary timestepPrecice_ #322

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 10, 2024

Conversation

BenjaminRodenberg
Copy link
Member

This is a pure refactoring to simplify the code if determining the time step size.

@BenjaminRodenberg BenjaminRodenberg self-assigned this Mar 10, 2024
Copy link
Member

@MakisH MakisH left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This indeed looks like a relic.
Is it only unnecessary, or was it also a bug?

@BenjaminRodenberg BenjaminRodenberg added the enhancement Nice to have, but not a problem label Mar 10, 2024
@BenjaminRodenberg
Copy link
Member Author

This indeed looks like a relic. Is it only unnecessary, or was it also a bug?

I think it was only unnecessarily complicated.

But it's always hard to pin bugs down if subcycling is involved, so I cannot promise I have not accidentally fixed a bug 😏 Therefore I also changed this to have a version of the code where I'm quite optimistic it's not buggy.

@MakisH
Copy link
Member

MakisH commented Mar 10, 2024

Just for the future reader: This was originally implemented with a separate variable (for preCICE v1) just to reduce the function calls and avoid duplication. No other particular intention here.

@MakisH MakisH merged commit a353484 into precice:develop Mar 10, 2024
4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement Nice to have, but not a problem
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants