-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 79
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
boundary="periodic"? #195
Comments
This makes sense to me. |
That’s a great idea, that would simplify the setup. |
PR welcome! 🙃 |
This issue has been marked 'stale' due to lack of recent activity. If there is no further activity, the issue will be closed in another 30 days. Thank you for your contribution! |
This change would make all the signatures for the functions and decorators in the |
Here is a suggestion: Implement internal logic to understand You could then implement something like this in if periodic:
DeprecationWarning('Dont use periodic anymore, instead set boundary='periodic')
boundary='periodic' # this needs to handle more complex cases (e.g. defined per axis), just for illustration here. That way none of the current tests should fail, but internally we can remove the ambiguity, and in a few versions remove |
Hi, I'm taking a peek at this *the full deprecation, that is. There are lots of tests which configure the grid with both Actually, I can see a commented-out case which would assert Lines 576 to 580 in 2b28b56
|
I keep finding it funny that xgcm has both
periodic
andboundary
kwargs. Logically it seems likeperiodic
should be replaced byboundary="periodic"
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: