svn revision 408 - ana_initial error

[thomas.roc]

Hi every one,

I have just upgraded my ROMS code through SVN and rerun a case which was working perfectly before the upgrading and unfortunately this following error message now pops up during the compilation:

analytical.f90(336): error #6645: The name of the module procedure conflicts with a name in the encompassing scoping unit. [ANA_INITIAL]
SUBROUTINE ana_initial (ng, tile, model)

Any ideas how to solve this one ?

Cheers

[kate]

First, you should check your Build/analytical.f90 to see if it's telling the truth. I've got the module name being analytical_mod, not ana_initial. The ana_initial.h file has subroutines ana_initial and ana_NLMinitial_tile. (I don't remember that NLM sneaking in...) Anyway, ana_initial.h is included by analytical.F to give:

Code: Select all

      MODULE analytical_mod
             :
      implicit none 
      CONTAINS
      SUBROUTINE ana_btflux (ng, tile, model, itrc)
              :
      END SUBROUTINE ana_grid_tile
      SUBROUTINE ana_initial (ng, tile, model)
              :

Do you have an ana_initial module coming from here or somewhere else?

[thomas.roc]

Hi Kate,

Sorry for the lateness of my answer.

I have just checked my analytical.f90 and yes indeed, my ana_initial module is coming from here.
By the way no trace of ana_NLMinitial_tile in analytical.f90. I have got instead ana_initial_tile.

Thanks a lot for your help.

[wilkin]

If it has been some time since your last svn update it may be that the wrapper code in analytical.F that calls your initial conditions code segment has changed, which can cause your customized ana_initial.h to be inconsistent with the new version.

Go to ROMS/Functionals and grab the new template file ana_initial.h, and compare to the one you previously made for you application. If there are significant differences, then the easiest way to remedy this is to paste your application-specific initial conditions (which are presumably only a few lines of code) into the new ana_initial.h and try again.

John.

[thomas.roc]

Spot on John !

Many thanks to you both.


Thomas