Unclear porgram flow when compiling with MTLN=YES

[Alberto-o]

When the compilation flag SEMBA_FDTD_ENABLE_MTLN=NO it is clear that semba will fail if multiwires are defined. However, it is possible to compile with SEMBA_FDTD_ENABLE_MTLN=YES and use thin wires if the execution flag -mtlnwires is not passed, and no multiwires are defined.

I'm not sure whether this should be the expected behaviour, or the behaviour should be:

• SEMBA_FDTD_ENABLE_MTLN=NO : only thin wires
• SEMBA_FDTD_ENABLE_MTLN=YES: only shielded or unshileded multiwres.

In this case, the flag -mtlnwires would be superflous (but needed at this point)

What do you think @lmdiazangulo @adrianarce-elemwave ?

[lmdiazangulo]

I think I am more in favour of removing the flag and keep this to be decided at compilation time. This would simplify the interactions and avoid some redundancy.

If a user still wants to use old thin wires, he could select it at compilation time. However, I consider that path as deprecated. The only thing that is not solved by that path are the slanted wires.

[adrianarce-elemwave]

From my side, I agree that using this flag might be redundant, as the only kind of wire that is not yet covered by MTLN are slanted wires. But removing that flag might be a huge spike so we have to be sure if we wnat to remove it.