i.e., the EclProblem does no longer need to implement the
`timeIntegration()` method itself. since `flow` does not use this code
path, it is unaffected.
this value is was chosen to exactly replicate `flow`'s behavior. IMO,
it would be less surprising to set the default to `1`, i.e., the user
needs to specify `--threads-per-process=$N` explicitly if
multithreaded linearization ought to be used.
`mebos` works similarly as `flow`, but in contrast to `flow`, `mebos`
only creates the deck in the common code path whilst the
'EclipseState' and the other higher-level parser objects are always
created internally by the vanguard. this approach avoids code
duplication and the worst effects of parser API creep.
to avoid having to compile non-trivial compile units multiple times,
the actual code of the variants is moved into `ebos_$VARIANT.{hh,cc}`
files and the respective compile units are each put into a small
static library whilst the main function of said libraries are invoked
by either the multiplexed or the respective specialized simulator's
`main()`. This is also somewhat similar of how `flow` works, with the
difference that `mebos` uses the blackoil variant to determine the
parameters it needs to know for parsing the deck instead of
introducing a "fake" type tag for this. The rationale is to reduce
compile time compared to the "fake type tag" approach and -- to a
lesser extend -- avoid unnecessary copy-and-pasting of code. In
particular, this means that for the vast majority of cases, only one
place needs changed in the code for all `ebos` variants if, for
example, the parser API requires further objects in the future.
this makes slightly incorrect decks usable with `ebos`. since the
common `flow` variants use a different code path to parse the deck,
they are unaffected. (as far as I can see, the only variant which
might be affected is `flow_ebos_oilwater_polymer_injectivity` and even
for it `flow`'s multiplexing code will abort the run before the
vanguard is even called.)
The intend is to make the purpose of `ebos` clearer: while it can be
used in production, the stability guarantees are somewhat lower than
for `flow` and testing is a bit less rigorous (most of the time).
