[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[netCDF #GMP-676686]: Potential bug in ncdump v4.3.3.1
- Subject: [netCDF #GMP-676686]: Potential bug in ncdump v4.3.3.1
- Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:13:21 -0600
> Full Name: Jim Enright
> Package Version: 4.3.3.1
> Operating System: CentOS 6.5
Hi Jim,
Thanks for reporting this bug. I've reproduced it here and will have it fixed
soon.
It's great that you identified a version in which it worked and a later version
that
has the bug, which makes it easy to find the exact git commit that introduced
the bug, using "git bisect".
--Russ
> We have come across a potential bug in the ncdump utility from version
> 4.3.3.1 of NetCDF when inspecting the output of an application we are working
> with.
>
> When one views this file using the full annotations for Fortran indices (the
> "-f f" option) there seems to be an off-by-1 error on the indexing. This
> causes some issue with the labelling of the last element in each dimension.
> I have reproduced this with the file created by the "simple_xy_wr.f90"
> example from the NetCDF-Fortran source tarball as shown below.
>
> $ ncdump -f f simple_xy.nc
> data =
> 0, // data(1,1)
> 1, // data(2,1)
> 2, // data(3,1)
> 3, // data(4,1)
> 4, // data(5,1)
> 5, // data(6,1)
> 6, // data(7,1)
> 7, // data(8,1)
> 8, // data(9,1)
> 9, // data(10,1)
> 10, // data(11,1)
> 11, // data(1,1) <== INCORRECT - should be data(12,1)
> 12, // data(1,2)
> ...
> ...
> 21, // data(10,2)
> 22, // data(11,2)
> 23, // data(1,2) <== INCORRECT - should be data(12,2)
> 24, // data(1,3)
>
> For an older version ncdump, from version NetCDF version 4.1.1, the correct
> behaviour is seen:
> $ ncdump -f f simple_xy.nc
> data =
> 0, // data(1,1)
> 1, // data(2,1)
> 2, // data(3,1)
> 3, // data(4,1)
> 4, // data(5,1)
> 5, // data(6,1)
> 6, // data(7,1)
> 7, // data(8,1)
> 8, // data(9,1)
> 9, // data(10,1)
> 10, // data(11,1)
> 11, // data(12,1) <== CORRECT
> 12, // data(1,2)
> ...
> ...
> 21, // data(10,2)
> 22, // data(11,2)
> 23, // data(12,2) <== CORRECT
> 24, // data(1,3)
>
> The same behaviour is seen when using C indices for a NetCDF file created by
> C code.
>
> Can you provide any advice on this please?
>
> Thanks for your help,
> Jim
>
>
>
Russ Rew UCAR Unidata Program
address@hidden http://www.unidata.ucar.edu
Ticket Details
===================
Ticket ID: GMP-676686
Department: Support netCDF
Priority: Normal
Status: Closed