We’re all going to be thinking you are making this up unless you can post an example which supports your assertion.
If there is a difference between some planner and MultiDeco I’d bet money on MultiDeco being correct.
My code I wrote to better understand how Bühlmann and GF works. There is nothing like having to write an implementation to clear up the corner cases. Who do I know if my code works? I compared a bunch of profiles with Ross’s ones.
Now, perhaps I have a typo in constants for a slow tissue, in that way there may me some depths and profile which come out wrong but I might not catch because I didn’t choose those profiles and that tissue never happens to be the limiting one. Perhaps Ross has such a bug, perhaps Shearwater does.
We can’t resolve such a possibility without an example.
I’d guess you are not comparing the same configurations. For example which of the three coefficient sets (A, B or C). Or ascent rate.
However, being a software developer is about finding out exactly how your code is wrong much more often than whether it is wrong, so I have an open mind, so please offer an example.
