-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
Testing more borts 2 #383
Testing more borts 2 #383
Changes from 13 commits
57d2352
17fa55f
cf8e54a
aecba3f
03265e0
411fbe3
231d7d7
7b8977a
46411f8
0ef3a52
088f2fa
af53343
1ae3a36
1dee10b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -27,6 +27,108 @@ | |
./test_bort_4 cmpmsg 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check codflg(). | ||
./test_bort_4 codflg 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Shouldn't this run_test_bort.sh script be in the test_scripts subdirectory along with all of the other test scripts, rather than in the test directory with all of the source code? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Well that is open to discussion. All the scripts in test_scripts are for utils, and I was planning on moving all of them to a test_utils directory. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Actually, the test_outtest.sh script (wrapper script for all of the outtest*F90 codes) is also in test_scripts, so it's not just scripts for testing utilities in that directory. That said, if you wanted to have a separate test_utils directory for all of the utility scripts, and then a separate test_scripts directory containing just your new test_bort.sh script and the test_outtest.sh script, I wouldn't be opposed to that ;-) |
||
# Check copybf(). | ||
./test_bort_4 copybf 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check copymg(). | ||
./test_bort_4 copymg 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check copysb(). | ||
./test_bort_4 copysb 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check sntbbe(). | ||
./test_bort_4 sntbbe 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check sntbde(). | ||
./test_bort_4 sntbde 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check stdmsg(). | ||
./test_bort_4 stdmsg 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check stndrd(). | ||
./test_bort_4 stndrd 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check strcpt(). | ||
./test_bort_4 strcpt 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Commented out until https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/NCEPLIBS-bufr/issues/384 | ||
# is resolved. | ||
# Check string(). | ||
#./test_bort_4 string 1 | ||
#[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbcnt(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbcnt 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbcpy(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbcpy 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbcup(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbcup 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbdmp(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbdmp 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbevn(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbevn 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbget(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbget 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbint(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbint 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbqcp(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbqcp 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbrep(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbrep 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbrms(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbrms 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufbseq(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufbseq 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check ufdump(). | ||
./test_bort_4 ufdump 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check upftbv(). | ||
./test_bort_4 upftbv 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check valx(). | ||
./test_bort_4 valx 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check wrdxtb(). | ||
./test_bort_4 wrdxtb 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
||
# Check wtstat(). | ||
./test_bort_4 wtstat 1 | ||
[ $? != 1 ] && exit 1 | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just curious, why are you moving the parameter descriptions in all of these routines to be after all of the remarks and discussion? The remarks and discussion notes refer to some of the parameters listed in the parameter descriptions, so it seems more sensible to keep those remarks and notes after the parameter descriptions like they were previously; otherwise, they're talking about concepts that haven't even been introduced yet!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's the way it is done in all the NCEPLIBS and I'm trying to maintain a similar look and feel everywhere. Description, parameters, return codes, author is how we do it everywhere else.