Bugfix/atrayano/maxmin support for nan

[atrayano]

Types of change(s)

• [x ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Trivial change (affects only documentation or cleanup)
• Refactor (no functional changes, no api changes)

Checklist

• [ x] Tested this change with a run of GEOSgcm
• Ran the Unit Tests (make tests)

Description

This PR fixes the behavior of MAPL_MaxMin in presence of NaN

Related Issue

#3289

[tclune]

A couple of minor suggestions - feel free to ignore.

[tclune]

`any(a/=a)` is standard conforming and concise. But also a bit obcure. Using `ieee_is_nan()` is better, but is technically less portable, as IEEE support is optional. (In practice it is supported though.) I just tend to forget the details of IEEE procedures since we use them rarely and would have needed to look them up. I’d vote for using the ieee procedure for clarity. But it is not worth further modification at this time. * Tom From: Matt Thompson ***@***.***> Date: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 1:22 PM To: GEOS-ESM/MAPL ***@***.***> Cc: Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) ***@***.***>, Mention ***@***.***> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [BULK] Re: [GEOS-ESM/MAPL] Bugfix/atrayano/maxmin support for nan (PR #3290) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of NASA. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. Use the "Report Message" button to report suspicious messages to the NASA SOC. @mathomp4 commented on this pull request.

________________________________ In base/MAPL_MaxMinMod.F90<#3290 (comment)>:

- pmax = max(pmax, a(i,j))

- pmin = min(pmin, a(i,j)) - enddo - qmax(j) = pmax - qmin(j) = pmin - enddo -! -! Now find max/min of amax/amin -! - pmax = qmax(1) - pmin = qmin(1) - do j=2,jt - pmax = max(pmax, qmax(j)) - pmin = min(pmin, qmin(j)) - enddo + has_nans = any(a /= a) Query for @tclune<https://github.com/tclune>: What is the best way to figure out if there are NaNs? This? Or should we do: has_nans=any(ieee_is_nan(a)) That is, is any(a /= a) perhaps more "generic" than using ieee_is_nan()? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#3290 (review)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABPP7YC5SYEUWU5XJAZNFBL2JQLOTAVCNFSM6AAAAABUX3X7YWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDKMZVGA4TANRRGY>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>