-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
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
Use iris.FUTURE.save_split_attrs = True
to remove iris warning
#2398
Conversation
I have no idea why the tests are failing. The test is complaining about a missing |
no, it's still there, but it's malformed:
as compared to without changes here:
note that I used iris=3.9 for both runs, see my comment below what's causing this...how to fix it? Anyone's guess 😀 |
OK Manu, dug deeper in this (no pub for me this Friday): that tracking id is now (as in, using the call to iris'
-> it shouldn't be, it should be a global attribute of the file, not of the variable, as is the case when not using the FUTURE call:
I think you should tell the iris folk the function is not doing the right thing 🍺 |
Attributes are now split between local (attached to the cube variable) and global, see https://scitools-iris.readthedocs.io/en/stable/generated/api/iris.cube.html#iris.cube.CubeAttrsDict.__setitem__ |
Yes, as Bouwe mentioned, this behavior of iris is expected. I was confused since it looked like the files are created without a
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2398 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 94.37% 94.38%
=======================================
Files 246 246
Lines 13736 13737 +1
=======================================
+ Hits 12964 12965 +1
Misses 772 772 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
bingo! Cheers for the work and info @schlunma and @bouweandela - I think the way attributes are handled in the new iris is not fully correct, but that's not in scope of this PR - this is cool now, but I'd still ask iris to think again about the new way
@chrisbillowsMO It looks like we forgot to label this pull request with the backwards incompatible change. Could you please update the changelog for v2.11 so this is listed under backward incompatible changes? |
Will do! |
Description
Closes #2376
Note: this is not fully backwards-compatible, as this changes the way iris writes attributes (some attributes are moved from global to local). I don't think this is a problem, but might be good to keep in mind.
Before you get started
Checklist
It is the responsibility of the author to make sure the pull request is ready to review. The icons indicate whether the item will be subject to the 🛠 Technical or 🧪 Scientific review.
Changes are backward compatiblesee aboveTo help with the number pull requests: