No subject

been with insufficient or incorrect metadata in the netcdf files I was
reading.  So, I was curious to see if I would get the usual segfault
when reading some of your data.  The result:  I was able to read a 5
year timeseries (5 yearly files of daily data) of your netcdf version of
the Reanalysis slps (from
ftp://ftp.cdc.noaa.gov/Datasets/ncep.reanalysis.dailyavgs/surface)
without problems.

So, if it is the metadata that makes the difference, thanks very much
for taking the care to accurately describe the data you provide and for
your work to help GrADS read these data.  It's good to know we don't
need to worry about writing a DDF for netcdf data from the CDC server.

Thanks also to the other GrADs developers that have given us users the
ability to read netcdf files from other sources.  Sure, it would be
ideal if all netcdf data followed the same standards, but in the
meantime we can still make use of the data we find.

    Cheers!
       Diane

Don Hooper wrote:
> I am absolutely flummoxed.  I go to all kinds of effort to create
> NetCDF files with sufficient metadata, and to teach GrADS how to
> *automatically* (I.E., without a Data Descriptor File (DDF),
> 'dtype netcdf' or otherwise), via the sdfopen command.  And yet
> people keep trying to write DDFs that require version 1.9 to
> read files that could be read without any back in version 1.6beta4.
> The mind boggles.  And experts at COLA abet this foolish enterprise.
> I just don't this *insistence* on doing things the hard way.  I
> really don't.  Just say:
> sdfopen /home/pfwillis/2006/Grads/circulation/Climate/data/slp_daily.1999.nc /home/pfwillis/2006/Grads/circulation/Climate/data/slp_daily.%y4.nc 731
>
> and go to work with the data.  No fuss, no muss.  Don't work so hard,
> folks; I did the hard work for you years ago.  Reap the benefits of
> my sweat, will you?  Please.
>
> -Hoop
>