I'm not sure I understand the change that you're talking about, but it seems that they were auto-detected in the past, since the example without them there used to work. I'm in favor of returning to that if possible. Regardless, I think it would be worthwhile to add something to the derived fields documentation discussing this. I could add that if we wanted it, but it will be good to have it reviewed, since I'm not very familiar with how it works.
It may not be documented, but I think we can actually auto-detect
them; this would add on a list of lists of strings to the hierarchy,
but I think that is manageable. Would this be worthwhile?
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Britton Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hi Sam,
> That fixed it, thanks! I actually encountered this problem while working on
> my own derived field that used ghost zones and was using VorticitySquared as
> my example for how to do it. I think in the past it was not required to
> list the fields with ValidateSpatial, which is why it was working as is in
> older versions. I wasn't able to find documentation on how to make fields
> that use ghost_zones. If it's in there and I just missed it, could someone
> point me toward it? If not, I could add something to the Creating Derived
> Fields section.
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Sam Skillman <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Hey Britton,
>> It looks like VorticitySquared wasn't specifying the necessary fields
>> (x,y,z velocity) in the definition. I will push a change momentarily after
>> I look around at any other ghost zone requiring fields to make sure they
>> work. DivV, for example, does the right thing.
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Britton Smith <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> I'm having a problem using fields that use ghost zones. The following
>>> simple script:
>>> gives this error:
>>> I am working from the tip, but I get the same behavior from yt/2.3. In
>>> yt/2.2, everything is working. I am working now to narrow that range down a
>>> bit, but does anyone have an idea?
>>> yt-users mailing list
>> yt-users mailing list
> yt-users mailing list
yt-users mailing list