# [ferret_users] Re: [ferret_users] Re: [ferret_users] [ferret_users] 20° E seems to be magic

Hi Martin,

Did you try to use explicitly "20E" instead of "-20"?  fill/l=1/grat/x=20E:40W/y=60S:0N sst
Also, try to do a simple "go land 1" after you filled your figure, to see if the continents are placed correctly according to the lon/lat (if not, then it may be a problem of coordinates in your data)

Cheers,
Nicolas

2017-01-27 11:51 GMT+00:00 baris onol :

yes? fill/l=1/x=-20.5:40.5/y=-60:0/over sst

On 01/27/2017 02:09 PM, Martin Schmidt wrote:
Dear ferreters,

I had to compile my pyferret by myself, so I am not sure if the subsequent bug is a general one.

ferret
NOAA/PMEL TMAP
PyFERRET v7 (opt)
Linux 3.19.0-64-generic - 07/01/16

yes? fill/l=1/grat/x=-20:40/y=-60:0 sst
yes? shade/over /lev=(100)/pal=grey missing(sst[l=1],100)

In my figure the land west of 20°E remains white.

The result for
yes? fill/l=1/grat/x=340:400/y=-60:0 sst
yes? shade/over /lev=(100)/pal=grey missing(sst[l=1],100)
is complementary.

I find also non-filled points in the function fill_xy near 20°E, where information on adjacent ocean points seems to be "blocked" at 20°E. This looks like if the same error is behind the scene, but in the above example the problem is most obvious.

Setting a region before calling the plot commands, everything is fine for this example:
yes? set region/x=-20:40/y=-60:0
yes? fill/l=1/grat sst
yes? shade/over /lev=(100)/pal=grey missing(sst[l=1],100)

But with fill_xy there is still one point not filled at 20°E.

Seems that 20°E is still a magic boundary?

So my question: For safe code, should it generally avoided to specify regions withing the plot commands? Is there another idea to get safe code.

Best,
Martin

--
----------------------------------------------------
Nicolas Freychet
PDRA, School of Geosciences
University of Edinburgh
----------------------------------------------------