-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 49
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
is_vertical
?
#15
Comments
It might be safest to get a tagged release of cf_units from which Iris can depend before we change the functionality too much. That way the work to get iris using cf_units rather than iris.units should be simpler. What do you think? |
True, but on the other hand if the suggestion is a change to the public API of cf_units (a name change) then perhaps it should go in before a tagged release. |
👍 from me. I can see @ajdawson's point, so perhaps we should tag 0.1 in the Iris "unchanged" form, and then look to iterate quickly and if necessary move on to v1.x within a release or two. |
Ping - is this still something you want to investigate @ocefpaf? |
I would not rename it and Ido not believe we can return Like: We will use this method to confirm that the units from a known vertical coordinate has the correct length or pressure units. Alternatives would be the horrible names: I guess that we could only add a note in the docs then!? |
Or |
I knew someone could com up with worse names 😉 I read the docs and they are clear enough:
My bad for opening this in the first place. Let's just close it. |
😛 |
is_vertical
returns True for distances. That is the correct behavior, but the name is not all that intuitive.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: