Feature 2040 parse timing

[JohnHalleyGotway]

Expected Differences

• Do these changes introduce new tools, command line arguments, or configuration file options? [No]
  
  If yes, please describe:
  

• Do these changes modify the structure of existing or add new output data types (e.g. statistic line types or NetCDF variables)? [No]
  
  If yes, please describe:
  

Pull Request Testing

• Describe testing already performed for these changes:
  

After these changes from myself and @jprestop, I re-tested using the plot_data_plane command listed in the issue.

bin/plot_data_plane out/grid_stat/grid_stat_120000L_20050807_120000V_pairs.nc fcst.ps 'name="FCST_TMP_Z2_DTC165"; level="(*,*)";' -v 4
...
DEBUG 4:    valid time: 20050807_120000
DEBUG 4:    lead time: 120000
DEBUG 4:    init time: 20050807_000000
DEBUG 4:    accum time: NA

Also tested using the OBS data, like this:

bin/plot_data_plane out/grid_stat/grid_stat_120000L_20050807_120000V_pairs.nc obs.ps 'name="OBS_TMP_Z2_DTC165"; level="(*,*)";' -v 4
...
DEBUG 4:    valid time: 20050807_120000
DEBUG 4:    lead time: 000000
DEBUG 4:    init time: 20050807_120000
DEBUG 4:    accum time: NA

The reported times now match the contents of the NetCDF header:

ncdump -h out/grid_stat/grid_stat_120000L_20050807_120000V_pairs.nc
...
		FCST_TMP_Z2_DTC165:init_time = "20050807_000000" ;
		FCST_TMP_Z2_DTC165:valid_time = "20050807_120000" ;
...
		OBS_TMP_Z2_DTC165:init_time = "20050807_120000" ;
		OBS_TMP_Z2_DTC165:valid_time = "20050807_120000" ;

• Recommend testing for the reviewer(s) to perform, including the location of input datasets, and any additional instructions:
  
  Review code changes and confirm that none of the automated tests have failed.

• Do these changes include sufficient documentation updates, ensuring that no errors or warnings exist in the build of the documentation? [Yes]
  No changes to the documentation are needed. This should already have been working!

• Do these changes include sufficient testing updates? [???]
  I did not add a new test to demonstrate this. If you think I should, please "request changes" on the PR, and I will.

• Will this PR result in changes to the test suite? [No]
  
  If yes, describe the new output and/or changes to the existing output:
  

• Please complete this pull request review by [Monday 2/14/22].
  

Pull Request Checklist

See the METplus Workflow for details.

• Complete the PR definition above.
• Ensure the PR title matches the feature or bugfix branch name.
• Define the PR metadata, as permissions allow.
  Select: Reviewer(s)
  Select: Organization level software support Project or Repository level development cycle Project
  Select: Milestone as the version that will include these changes
• After submitting the PR, select Linked issues with the original issue number.
• After the PR is approved, merge your changes. If permissions do not allow this, request that the reviewer do the merge.
• Close the linked issue and delete your feature or bugfix branch from GitHub.

[jprestop]

I reviewed the changes and confirmed that none of the automated tests failed. I don’t think a new test to demonstrate this fix is necessary. I approve this PR.