> Joakim Hove wrote:
>> Sounds like a good plan. In the not-so-distant future we might consider
>> renaming opm-parser -> opm-eclipse?

To avoid the wrath of Schlumberger, it's probably a good idea not to do 
that...

On Monday 27 January 2014 11:47:43 Alf Birger Rustad wrote:
> I am not sure that is a good idea. It depends on what we want to accomplish
> I guess, and putting restrictive names on projects may end up restricting
> it unnecessarily in practice. In this case there are two issues. One is do
> we really want to restrict opm-parser to Eclipse formats? The reason we
> implement support for Eclipse formats is because of its dominating market
> position and what that entails. Moving forward though, I do think we at
> some point want to support at least one additional input format, and I do
> believe that the current design of opm-parser is a good starting point for
> that. Secondly, I believe having basic IO routines spread out across repos
> makes no sense other than creating sandboxes for developers. I believe
> parsing belongs in a common library along with other shared functionality,
> which is not exactly what opm-core is today. Making a library optional
> fine, but I do think a simulator needs input format, and this is all we
> have, so I am not sure the solvers will be of much use without it
> currently. Hence I suggest keeping the opm-parser name for know, but that
> we set a side some time to review our repository organization later this
> year.

I agree that in the long run supporting/creating a more sane format makes 
quite a bit of sense and the name of the parser module should be more generic 
for this reason. Though I'm not sure whether the current data structures in 
opm-parser are a too good fit for something other than Eclipse, mainly because 
they have been designed to cope with the idiosyncrasies of the eclipse file 
format. Nevertheless they're probably a good starting point.

cheers
  Andreas

-- 
 Who wrote this! And what was I thinking?
                          — "Overheard" by Ted Gould

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Opm mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.opm-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opm

Reply via email to