-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 117
Really limit processing of deck to actnum to determine active cells. #4361
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
Draft
blattms
wants to merge
1
commit into
OPM:master
Choose a base branch
from
blattms:feature/limit-equals-to-actnum-determining-active-cells
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
If we're going to make this optimisation, then the
continuestatement should at least be afterbox.update(). We absolutely need to account for those updates because they give the default box bounds for the next record.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.
I don't necessarily agree. My interpretation is that within Equals the box information only is used per target keyword. I can very well be wrong here.
You do have a point though: For the first occurrence of the target keyword the default box is the one specified by the last BOX/ENDBOX declaration. Which means that master also neglects this...
Summoning @gdfldm
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.
If we have something like
then the
PERMXbox is{3..9, 3..9, 3..9}, thePERMYbox is also{3..9, 3..9, 3..9}while thePERMZbox is{3..9, 5..7, 4..9}. That's why it's essential that we capture those box settings.For the most part, yes. However, the input box is reset to the default global dimensions of
{1..NX, 1..NY, 1..NZ}at the end of each section (i.e.,GRID/EDIT/PROPS&c).I believe the current master souces do the right thing.
Handle_keyword()takes a reference to the current input box and updates it when encountering aBOX(orENDBOX) keyword. That box is then copied intohandle_operation()and updated according to whatever box specification is provided in the operation keyword records. On the other hand, those updates do not propagate back out of the operation keyword.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.
I agree, all of the box definitions need to be parsed to keep track of the current default box.