You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In recent MOM vs POP MARBL comparison runs, I noticed that photoC_NO3_TOT_zint_100m is all zeros.
Digging into the code and commit history, I see that I added a declaration for photoC_NO3_TOT_zint_100m in e7deac5, but did not add code to compute the diagnostic.
I guess we haven't looked at this diagnostic. It is not a CMIP diagnostic, while the related diagnostic photoC_NO3_TOT_zint is.
I'm not sure if we should remove photoC_NO3_TOT_zint_100m or add code to compute it.
I'm leaning towards the former, given that this issue hasn't been noticed in the 4 years since the diagnostic was added.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In recent MOM vs POP MARBL comparison runs, I noticed that
photoC_NO3_TOT_zint_100m
is all zeros.Digging into the code and commit history, I see that I added a declaration for
photoC_NO3_TOT_zint_100m
in e7deac5, but did not add code to compute the diagnostic.I guess we haven't looked at this diagnostic. It is not a CMIP diagnostic, while the related diagnostic
photoC_NO3_TOT_zint
is.I'm not sure if we should remove
photoC_NO3_TOT_zint_100m
or add code to compute it.I'm leaning towards the former, given that this issue hasn't been noticed in the 4 years since the diagnostic was added.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: