handle missing modes more gently (from Bitbucket)

[sfield17]

This is from Richard:

• Right now, EvaluateSurrogate accepts 'ell_m', a list of modes to load
• Until I look at the surrogate file itself, I don't know what modes are available (e.g., single mode vs multi mode)
• If I pass an 'ell_m' list that includes modes that aren't available in the surrogate (e.g., all modes below some lmax; modes with m<0, for a reflection-symmetric model), the code fails to find them in the .h5 file, and fails.

Would it be possible to modify 'CreateManyEvaluateSingleModeSurrogate' (old interface) to either handle requested but missing modes more gently, by taking the intersection of the modes that are requested and the modes that are available? In about line 780 in surrogate.py?

Specifically, the following

   ### compile list of available modes ###
  modes_available =[]
  for kk in fp.keys():
      splitkk = kk.split('_')
      if splitkk[0][0] == 'l' and splitkk[1][0] == 'm':
        ell = int(splitkk[0][1])
        emm = int(splitkk[1][1:])
        if not (ell, emm) in exc_modes:
          modes_available.append((ell,emm))
  if ell_m is None:
    mode_keys = modes_available
  else:
    mode_keys = []
    for i, mode in enumerate(ell_m):
      if mode in exc_modes:
        print "WARNING: Mode (%d,%d) is both included and excluded! Excluding it."%mode 
      else:
        if mode in modes_available:
          mode_keys.append(mode)

[sfield17]

Suggested fix:

• try evaluating models with missing modes and see what happens. Is the message clear? If not change it.