[Paraview] Minor bug in OPENFOAM filter

[Takuya OSHIMA]

Hi Eugene and all,

Sorry for not giving a concrete solution but just a comment. The
current reader handles the complex OpenFOAM format without a priori
knowledge of exact format of a specific dictionary entry. With further
growing complexity and format extensions made over OpenFOAM versions,
there can always be such a problem especially when reading entries
required by certain types of boundary conditions. Either implementing
such knowledge or skipping the entire dictionary entries other than
the "value" entries in the boudaryFields could be an idea though.

Takuya OSHIMA, Ph.D.
Faculty of Engineering, Niigata University
8050 Ikarashi-Ninocho, Nishi-ku, Niigata, 950-2181, JAPAN

From: paraview-request at paraview.org
Subject: ParaView Digest, Vol 146, Issue 25
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 12:00:08 -0400

> Hi,
> 
> We have come across a minor but annoying bug in the Paraview OPENFOAM reader.
> 
> The component of the Paraview OPENFOAM parser that reads boundary conditions has been set up to always expect another number where a scalar is encountered in the following configuration:
> 
> (1.111 ###
> 
> when you follow a bracket-scalar with another bracket like this
> 
> (1.111 (
> 
> an exception is thrown and the field is not loaded. However, if the leading number is an integer, then it copes fine:
> 
> (1 (###
> 
> So it simply doesn't parse a scalar followed by a bracket. Most of such instances are not relevant to the display of data as they concern table inputs for time varying vector boundary conditions. The current workaround is to always use integers in interpolation input tables, but obviously this is not ideal. To reproduce the issue, simply add the following entry to any boundary condition for any volumetric field:
> 
> RandomEntry table (1.1 ( 1 2 3));
> 
> It will result in an "Error reading line XXX ... " output and the field that the entry was added to will not be loaded. If you change it to:
> 
> RandomEntry table (1 ( 1 2 3));
> 
> Then it works fine. I can provide a small case that reproduces the issue if the above is not clear.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Eugene de Villiers
> e.devilliers at engys.com<mailto:e.devilliers at engys.com>
> Mob: +44 (0) 77 89748490
> Tel: +44 (0)20 32393041 (ext. 102)
> Fax: +44 (0)20 33573123
> [logo_red-black_fonts_signature]<http://www.engys.com/>
> 
> This message is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete this e-mail and all attachments from your system.
>