closing and reopening to trigger codecov analysis

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 90.26549% with 33 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 78.49%. Comparing base (e6356e7) to head (e4f8060).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #211      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   77.45%   78.49%   +1.04%     
==========================================
  Files          55       56       +1     
  Lines        9420     9755     +335     
==========================================
+ Hits         7296     7657     +361     
+ Misses       2124     2098      -26     

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

Looks pretty good in my first pass.

• I think we need to add some protections to the modal model. For example, I can attempt to run with emissions/dilution (it won't complain) but they won't do anything. However these are in the spec file (they're zero for the purpose of this scenario but it leads one to think that maybe they could be changed) and they are read in (due to other PartMC subroutines). I think maybe we just add some asserts in partmc_modal to warn/error out on unsupported behavior.
• Similarly, I could also attempt to turn coagulation on. This isn't actually read anywhere. I guess what we really need is an input_format_modal similar to how we have them for input_format_particle, sectional to say what is supported.
• We do need to figure out what to do with the scenario. Honestly I'm wondering if we should consider switching this scenario to being a test case (this is what we did with the immersion freezing). This scenario already fits in pretty well with what is found in test/loss. Making it a test would also make codecov happy. Alternatively, I think if it wants to reach scenario levels by making it interesting, we could consider running it for the particle-resolved case and/or sectional case. Just something to consider.

Thanks for the review, @jcurtis2 ! Here is a summary of changes in response to your first pass:

• Added input guards in spec_file_read_run_modal that produce fatal errors if any unsupported option is enabled: do_camp_chem, do_tchem, do_coagulation, do_condensation, do_mosaic, do_optical, do_nucleation, do_immersion_freezing;
• added assert_msg checks that aerosol emissions and dilution rates are zero
• Added test_loss_13.sh (non-QUADPACK build) and test_loss_14.sh (QUADPACK build), each running the modal drydep simulation and comparing against a committed reference
• Added test_loss_15.sh to make sure modal processing script is covered by tests and executes without error
• Removed redundant print statements
• Changed die_msg to assert_msg for the QUADPACK error check and corrected the conditional
• Removed necessary char_radius = 0d0 assignment
• Removed unused variables
• Clarified that density is a scalar applied uniformly across modes
• Clarified some other comments
• Changed output prefix from data/ to out/ for consistency with other scenarios
• Added explicit output file path argument to modal processing
• Fixed indentation issues throughout