[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[netCDF #STJ-180044]: Small documentation omission?

This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.

  • Subject: [netCDF #STJ-180044]: Small documentation omission?
  • Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:52:04 -0600
Hi Dave,

> It seems that in the C interface documentation the nc_create and
> nc__create pages do not include among the creation mode flags the
> flag NC_CLASSIC_MODEL. Is there a reason for this? The classic model
> of NetCDF 4 seems to be less well covered in the documentation than
> in earlier versions of the NetCDF 4 docs. Is this just my
> imagination?
>
> I do note that there is a reference to NC_CLASSIC_MODEL in the last
> example on the nc_create page.

Thanks for pointing out the omission.  I've updated the C guide to
include NC_CLASSIC_MODEL where needed.  I don't think we've removed
classic model documentation, but several of us are updating the users
guides, so I could have missed something.

By the way, the NC_CLASSIC_MODEL flag by itself does not identify the
netCDF-4 classic model format, to get that you have to or it with the
NC_NETCDF4 flag:

  status = nc_create("foo_HDF5_classic.nc", NC_NETCDF4|NC_CLASSIC_MODEL,
  &ncid);

If you just supply the NC_CLASSIC_MODEL flag by itself, it will just
use the classic file format.  I'm sure problems resulting from this source
of confusion will lead to an FAQ about it ...

--Russ

Russ Rew                                         UCAR Unidata Program
address@hidden                     http://www.unidata.ucar.edu



Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: STJ-180044
Department: Support netCDF
Priority: Normal
Status: Closed