In the top-level unit_test/_parameters, we have:
primary_species_1 string ""
primary_species_2 string ""
primary_species_3 string ""
the intent of this is to set the name of the dominant species, and then create various mixtures of the composition including these species
using the setup_composition() function. This is used, e.g., by test_react to create a number of different compositions that are mapped onto one of the dimensions of the thermodynamic data cube we are testing with.
burn_cell_primordial_chem redefines these as real:
primary_species_1 real 1.0e0
primary_species_2 real 0.0e0
primary_species_3 real 0.0e0
primary_species_4 real 0.0e0
primary_species_5 real 0.0e0
...
this is a bad design.
I think that burn_cell_primordial_chem and burn_cell_metal_chem should instead use the parameters:
X1 real 1.0e0
X2 real 0.0e0
X3 real 0.0e0
X4 real 0.0e0
X5 real 0.0e0
X6 real 0.0e0
X7 real 0.0e0
...
that are already defined in unit_test/_parameters or use a different name altogether so it doesn't clash with the convention used by other problems.
In the top-level
unit_test/_parameters, we have:the intent of this is to set the name of the dominant species, and then create various mixtures of the composition including these species
using the
setup_composition()function. This is used, e.g., bytest_reactto create a number of different compositions that are mapped onto one of the dimensions of the thermodynamic data cube we are testing with.burn_cell_primordial_chemredefines these asreal:this is a bad design.
I think that
burn_cell_primordial_chemandburn_cell_metal_chemshould instead use the parameters:that are already defined in
unit_test/_parametersor use a different name altogether so it doesn't clash with the convention used by other problems.