LinearizedEuler3D

[DanielDoehring]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

• The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
• All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
• No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

• The code can be understood easily.
• Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
• There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
• There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
• The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

• New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
• Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
• Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
• Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
• If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md.

Testing

• The PR passes all tests.
• New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
• New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

• There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
• If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

• The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
• If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
  are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

[lchristm]

Thanks for adding this! I just found a few minor things like typos. I did not visually check the solution obtained from the new Gauss wall example elixir. The rest looks good to me!

[DanielDoehring]

Thanks @lchristm ! I slightly adjusted the wall example, the rest I left untouched.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 95.04950% with 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 96.30%. Comparing base (b1a84a6) to head (fc7e86b).

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/equations/linearized_euler_3d.jl	94.74%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1903      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.12%   96.30%   +0.18%     
==========================================
  Files         448      450       +2     
  Lines       36081    36182     +101     
==========================================
+ Hits        34682    34843     +161     
+ Misses       1399     1339      -60     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	96.30% <95.05%> (+0.18%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[lchristm]

The changes look good to me now, but test coverage seems to be lower than required by the CI checks. You still need approval from one of the devs with write access to get this merged. Thanks again!

[DanielDoehring]

IMO, this is ready to go - any mergers @andrewwinters5000 @jlchan @ranocha @sloede ?

[sloede]

Note: EOC numbers to confirm expected convergence can be found here:
#1903 (comment)

[sloede]

LGTM!

[andrewwinters5000]

LGTM! Just one small remark about one of the comments.