Update bash ex-scripts to be linter compliant #4151
Conversation
Exports variables reported by shellcheck as being unused. A more careful examination is needed to remove unnecessary variables.
WalterKolczynski-NOAA
requested review from
BoCui-NOAA,
BrianCurtis-NOAA,
CatherineThomas-NOAA,
ChristopherHill-NOAA,
CoryMartin-NOAA,
DavidHuber-NOAA,
EdwardSafford-NOAA,
EricSinsky-NOAA,
JessicaMeixner-NOAA,
RussTreadon-NOAA,
WenMeng-NOAA,
aerorahul and
sbanihash
as code owners
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can someone point me to where 4 spaces instead of 2 is the standard for the g-w or some linter check? I was unaware that was a thing, since 2 spaces is very widely used across the g-w.
This PR needs to be tested on WCOSS2 to ensure that all wave AWIPS, etc jobs are still running as expected as this changes those scripts and I think most of the changes were spaces, but I'm still going through to confirm as github isn't showing all of them as such. Additionally, wave jobs should be checked that the contents is the same before and after this PR as there were a few places where commands were changed.
| mv buoy_log.tmp buoy_log.dat | ||
|
|
||
| Nb=$(wc buoy_log.dat | awk '{ print $1 }') | ||
| Nb=$(wc -l < buoy_log.dat) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was it confirmed that all point output is the same for waves after this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just compared the contents of gfs.t12z.bull.tar, and the contents are identical. Is that sufficient, or do you want me to check all the tarballs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we do a quick check on one of the boundary point tar balls as well? That should then be sufficient.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yup, looks good
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks for checking.
| err_exit "MISSING BULLETIN INFO" | ||
| fi | ||
| echo ' Looping over buoys ...' | ||
| echo |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's wrong with \n?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't make this change manually. Must be something shfmt does.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@WalterKolczynski-NOAA I think that this comes from the change you made to .editorconfig:
https://github.com/NOAA-EMC/global-workflow/blame/5fa67e3339e300c9d380e32c98dba541948fbfcc/.editorconfig#L25-L38
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Disregard, replied to the wrong comment.
@WalterKolczynski-NOAA I think that this comes from the change you made to .editorconfig: |
So this is a new thing. This even seems inconsistent in .editorconfig as well. Is .editorconfig where we should be looking for these sorts of standards in the future? |
Yes. I will note before this point, no standard was enforced for bash scripts, which is why different scripts had different indentation. This PR is part of applying a standard to all the legacy scripts so enforcement can begin. Four spaces is a compromise between space usage and visibility, and is consistent with the python scripts. |
3 participants
Description
Updates the ex-scripts to be compliant with both
shellcheckandshfmt. This does not necessarily enforce some standards not checked byshellcheck. Export statements are added to some variables to avoid 'not used' errors. In the future, a more careful analysis should be done to see if these variables are used downstream by executables or if they are truly unused, in which case they should be removed.Scripts employing MPMD are also updated to use
run_mpmd.sh. This resulted in some retooling of those scripts.Refs: #397
Type of change
Change characteristics
How has this been tested?
Checklist