Fwd: [CP2K:897] Re: units update?

[Matthias]

Teo,

well, it seems we have different opinions in this respect. So let's
stop the discussion before it becomes polemic.

cheers,

Matthias

On Mar 27, 9:46 am, Teodoro Laino <teodor... at gmail.com> wrote:
> Matthias,
>
>
>
> > Again, a mechanism appropriate for released versions that's what I was
> > referring to.
>
> does this mean that for every non-back compatible implementation we
> will have an additional
> command line flag or keyword? uhmmm...
>
>
>
> > That's not the point. In CP2K some care was taken from the very
> > beginning that mathematical and physical constants are really
> > "constant" and unique within the code and in my opinion that should
> > also be the case for different code versions. I would just like to
> > recall this.
>
> This care won't be wasted updating to the a new CODATA set.
> (I'm not an expert but I assume that the CODATA sets are internally
> consistent)
> Sorry but yours is not the point.
>
> > Do you really want to discuss the issue of 20 more code lines for a
> > code consisting of 500k lines?
>
> well.. if you think so.. just open one of the many files consisting
> of duplications
> (can send you the whole list if you like..) divide it in blocks of 20
> lines and start
> cleaning them.. thanks!
>
> > Alternatively, we could just accept one set of constants and ignore
> > any minor update of these constants in the future. I have no problem
> > with this policy.
>
> nono.. better.. we can introduce each time a new command line flag...
>
> Teo