[GeoMechanicsApplication] Add json formatting exception list by rfaasse · Pull Request #14111 · KratosMultiphysics/Kratos

rfaasse · 2026-01-09T12:30:34Z

📝 Description
This PR adds a list of almost all json files as exceptions for our new formatter. I removed a few files from here, such that the result of the new functionality, added to kp format is clear and show what formatted jsons will look like

…ing in length

rfaasse · 2026-01-09T12:38:39Z

The idea of this list is, that we can slowly format the old files by removing a few lines of this exception file, while new jsons will be formatted automatically

…ting-exception-list

WPK4FEM

Hi Richard.
Getting to a uniform formatting is a good thing, that hopefully does not lead to longer and more verbose files. I have no clue if my remarks are even feasible with the tools at hand. Please have a look at the remarks, but wait for reactions of others before taking actions.
Thank you, Wijtze Pieter

WPK4FEM · 2026-03-10T14:41:04Z

+                    "IGNORE_UNDRAINED": true,
+                    "YOUNG_MODULUS": 1e+04,
+                    "POISSON_RATIO": 0.0,
+                    "DENSITY_SOLID": 2.65,
+                    "DENSITY_WATER": 1.0,
+                    "POROSITY": 0.36,
+                    "BULK_MODULUS_SOLID": 1e+09,
+                    "BULK_MODULUS_FLUID": 1.755e+05,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_XX": 0.1521,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_YY": 0.1521,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_XY": 0.0,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_ZZ": 0.1521,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_YZ": 0.0,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_ZX": 0.0,
+                    "DYNAMIC_VISCOSITY": 9.81,
+                    "BIOT_COEFFICIENT": 1.0,
+                    "RETENTION_LAW": "SaturatedLaw",
+                    "SATURATED_SATURATION": 1.0


is it possible that to have a rule that aligns the things after the : ? ( for that it would be nice if the font has equal width characters. such that it really aligns )

Suggested change

"IGNORE_UNDRAINED": true,

"YOUNG_MODULUS": 1e+04,

"POISSON_RATIO": 0.0,

"DENSITY_SOLID": 2.65,

"DENSITY_WATER": 1.0,

"POROSITY": 0.36,

"BULK_MODULUS_SOLID": 1e+09,

"BULK_MODULUS_FLUID": 1.755e+05,

"PERMEABILITY_XX": 0.1521,

"PERMEABILITY_YY": 0.1521,

"PERMEABILITY_XY": 0.0,

"PERMEABILITY_ZZ": 0.1521,

"PERMEABILITY_YZ": 0.0,

"PERMEABILITY_ZX": 0.0,

"DYNAMIC_VISCOSITY": 9.81,

"BIOT_COEFFICIENT": 1.0,

"RETENTION_LAW": "SaturatedLaw",

"SATURATED_SATURATION": 1.0

"IGNORE_UNDRAINED": true,

"YOUNG_MODULUS": 1e+04,

"POISSON_RATIO": 0.0,

"DENSITY_SOLID": 2.65,

"DENSITY_WATER": 1.0,

"POROSITY": 0.36,

"BULK_MODULUS_SOLID": 1e+09,

"BULK_MODULUS_FLUID": 1.755e+05,

"PERMEABILITY_XX": 0.1521,

"PERMEABILITY_YY": 0.1521,

"PERMEABILITY_XY": 0.0,

"PERMEABILITY_ZZ": 0.1521,

"PERMEABILITY_YZ": 0.0,

"PERMEABILITY_ZX": 0.0,

"DYNAMIC_VISCOSITY": 9.81,

"BIOT_COEFFICIENT": 1.0,

"RETENTION_LAW": "SaturatedLaw",

"SATURATED_SATURATION": 1.0

Further for doubles in scientific notation, I would like if at least the . is present 1e+04 --> 1.e+04 or even nicer 1.0e+04

I don't think json writing does the alignment in general. We could have a look how difficult it would be to implement it.

For the double in scientific notation, I'll have a look, that shouldn't be difficult

WPK4FEM · 2026-03-10T14:42:15Z

+        "problem_name": "apply_initial_uniform_stress_field",
+        "start_time": 0.0,
+        "end_time": 1.0,
+        "echo_level": 1,
+        "parallel_type": "OpenMP",
+        "number_of_threads": 1
    },


Also in the ProjectParameters.json files, some alignment after the : would be nice.

WPK4FEM · 2026-03-10T14:43:57Z

+                    "DENSITY_SOLID": 2.242609582059123e+03,
+                    "DENSITY_WATER": 1.019367991845056e+03,


This is nice.

WPK4FEM · 2026-03-10T14:44:11Z

                    "PERMEABILITY_YY": 1.5041e-12,
                    "PERMEABILITY_XY": 0.0,
-                    "DYNAMIC_VISCOSITY": 0.0013,
+                    "DYNAMIC_VISCOSITY": 1.3e-03,


this is nice too.

WPK4FEM · 2026-03-10T14:45:19Z

+                    "UMAT_PARAMETERS": [
+                        4.998729486706428e-02,
+                        0.19999260891644746,
+                        1.999926089164475e-02,
+                        8.64e+04,
+                        1.5
+                    ],


could be shorter if the opening and closing [ ] are on the lines of the first and last item of the list.

WPK4FEM · 2026-03-10T14:47:16Z

+                            "nodal_results": [
+                                "TOTAL_DISPLACEMENT",
+                                "WATER_PRESSURE",
+                                "CAUCHY_STRESS_TENSOR",
+                                "TOTAL_STRESS_TENSOR"
+                            ],


also here is having [ "TOTAL_DISPLACEMENT]",
...
"TOTAL_STRESS_TENSOR"],
shorter and ( for me ) clearer.

We could make that work, I'm curious if others have the same opinion. Personally, I don't mind the two extra lines that much, so for simplicitly I'd prefer to keep it as it is, but if the team feels it's better we can of course do it

I like the way it is now slightly more than what @WPK4FEM suggests, but it's really a matter of taste. I'm curious what the others think. I'm okay with either way.

Okay, then for now I propose to merge it as-is. We can always change it when we change our minds

indigocoral

Thanks for this much-needed JSON formatting. I only have some personal opinions about it.

indigocoral · 2026-03-11T14:21:33Z

+                    "IGNORE_UNDRAINED": true,
+                    "YOUNG_MODULUS": 1e+04,
+                    "POISSON_RATIO": 0.0,
+                    "DENSITY_SOLID": 2.65,
+                    "DENSITY_WATER": 1.0,
+                    "POROSITY": 0.36,
+                    "BULK_MODULUS_SOLID": 1e+09,
+                    "BULK_MODULUS_FLUID": 1.755e+05,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_XX": 0.1521,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_YY": 0.1521,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_XY": 0.0,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_ZZ": 0.1521,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_YZ": 0.0,
+                    "PERMEABILITY_ZX": 0.0,
+                    "DYNAMIC_VISCOSITY": 9.81,
+                    "BIOT_COEFFICIENT": 1.0,
+                    "RETENTION_LAW": "SaturatedLaw",
+                    "SATURATED_SATURATION": 1.0


Just a question from my side: Why did the previous format need changing in this case?
I liked that we have all the values in a straight line/column. Made it easy for me to read the values... But I'm just curious...

It didn't have to, I just don't know at this point how to make sure the formatting does alignment correctly. The default python json writer doesn't seem to have that option, but we could have a look into how difficult it would be to do so.

indigocoral · 2026-03-11T14:22:40Z

-        "buffer_size":                        2,
-        "echo_level":                         1,
-        "clear_storage":                      false,
-        "compute_reactions":                  true,
-        "move_mesh_flag":                     false,
-        "reform_dofs_at_each_step":           false,


Also here the alignment seemed more neat in my opinion...

indigocoral · 2026-03-11T14:24:55Z

+        "newmark_theta": 0.5,
+        "strategy_type": "newton_raphson",
+        "convergence_criterion": "residual_criterion",
+        "residual_relative_tolerance": 1e-04,


Below is how I always do it. But it's really personal preference...

Suggested change

"residual_relative_tolerance": 1e-04,

"residual_relative_tolerance": 1.0e-04,

I agree, I'll have a look, shouldn't be too difficult to fix

indigocoral · 2026-03-11T14:27:42Z

+                    "UMAT_PARAMETERS": [
+                        4.998729486706428e-02,
+                        0.19999260891644746,
+                        1.999926089164475e-02,
+                        8.64e+04,
+                        1.5
+                    ],


This is nice change!

indigocoral

Thanks for adding the .0 to the values. I have no further remarks on this. Hopefully in the future we can come up with a format that does keep the alignments, as that was more neat and easy to read in my opinion.
Thank you!

indigocoral · 2026-03-13T12:39:45Z

                "Variables": {
                    "IGNORE_UNDRAINED": true,
-                    "YOUNG_MODULUS": 1e+04,
+                    "YOUNG_MODULUS": 1.0e+04,


Nice! Thanks for this.

avdg81

Hi Richard,
Thanks for preparing this PR will help us to enforce a consistent formatting of the JSON files. I have only one suggestions and some compliments 👍

avdg81 · 2026-03-16T14:54:23Z

+        "residual_relative_tolerance": 1.0e-04,
+        "residual_absolute_tolerance": 1.0e-09,


I like this notation more than what it used to be 👍

avdg81 · 2026-03-16T14:58:09Z

        "time_stepping": {
            "time_step": 1,
-            "max_delta_time_factor": 86400000000
+            "max_delta_time_factor": 8.64e+10


Much more readable 👍 Thank you.

avdg81 · 2026-03-16T15:00:18Z

+                            "nodal_results": [
+                                "TOTAL_DISPLACEMENT",
+                                "WATER_PRESSURE",
+                                "CAUCHY_STRESS_TENSOR",
+                                "TOTAL_STRESS_TENSOR"
+                            ],


I like the way it is now slightly more than what @WPK4FEM suggests, but it's really a matter of taste. I'm curious what the others think. I'm okay with either way.

avdg81 · 2026-03-16T16:42:59Z

I would suggest to use Unix-style path separators rather than Windows-style ones, to avoid misinterpretation of characters (for instance, \n may be understood as a newline character, whereas /n will not).

Good point, done!

…ting-exception-list

avdg81

I feel this PR is good to go. 👍

rfaasse added 5 commits January 6, 2026 12:05

Added exceptions for json formatting, which we can slowly start reduc…

111a603

…ing in length

Removed single dsettlement test from list

d54bad9

Reformatted said test using kp format

b0f9eca

Reformatting

47cb4d1

Added one more test for illustration purposes

f774a83

rfaasse commented Jan 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

rfaasse added 2 commits March 10, 2026 13:50

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into geo/add-json-format…

8c5feda

…ting-exception-list

Added some new exceptions

c913dd5

rfaasse self-assigned this Mar 10, 2026

rfaasse marked this pull request as ready for review March 10, 2026 13:38

rfaasse requested a review from a team as a code owner March 10, 2026 13:38

WPK4FEM reviewed Mar 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

indigocoral reviewed Mar 11, 2026

View reviewed changes

Adjustment to double in scientific notation

81ab108

indigocoral previously approved these changes Mar 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

avdg81 reviewed Mar 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Changed '\' to '/' in exceptions_for_json_formatting.txt

ca19c95

rfaasse dismissed indigocoral’s stale review via ca19c95 March 17, 2026 12:57

rfaasse added 2 commits March 17, 2026 15:04

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into geo/add-json-format…

bc41b0e

…ting-exception-list

Added newly added tests to the exception list

d711970

rfaasse requested a review from avdg81 March 17, 2026 14:51

avdg81 approved these changes Mar 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

rfaasse enabled auto-merge (squash) March 17, 2026 15:44

rfaasse merged commit ad13e76 into master Mar 17, 2026
10 checks passed

rfaasse deleted the geo/add-json-formatting-exception-list branch March 17, 2026 16:04

		"DENSITY_SOLID": 2.242609582059123e+03,
		"DENSITY_WATER": 1.019367991845056e+03,

	"residual_relative_tolerance": 1e-04,
	"residual_relative_tolerance": 1.0e-04,

		"residual_relative_tolerance": 1.0e-04,
		"residual_absolute_tolerance": 1.0e-09,

Conversation

rfaasse commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

WPK4FEM left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

indigocoral left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

indigocoral left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

avdg81 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

avdg81 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants