|
|
| Re: Trouble with IDL 5.0.2 (sunos sparc) map_set and contour [message #10805 is a reply to message #10791] |
Fri, 23 January 1998 00:00  |
Jean Newman
Messages: 3
Registered: January 1998
|
Junior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, David Fanning wrote:
> Jean Newman (jcn@u.washington.edu) writes:
>
>> I have some IDL routines which under IDL 4* would plot a map and then
>> place filled contours of bathymetry on the map. Under IDL 5.0.2 it shifts
>> all the fill colors up 1, the color is on the up side rather than on the
>> downside of the contour line. The weird part is if I comment out the
>> map_set command and use plot instead, with everything else the same, then
>> it works just as it did before/correctly. Could anyone tell me what's
>> going on?
>
> One might argue (as I am sure RSI would) that it actually
> worked *incorrectly* before and it works correctly now.
> But, no, I can't tell you what is going on. It would
> be helpful if RSI could provide a bit more explanation about
> these kinds of changes.
>
Ok, so CONTOUR works a little different now. I set up a simple
array and using PLOT & CONTOUR I figured out what I needed to do to get
my filled contours to look the same, which involved adding an extra
contour level equal to my bottom value. But when I made the changes to
my mapping routine it still shifted the colors up 1, the color for -500
was used for -250 etc. So I changed the MAP_SET to PLOT just to see if it
made a difference and it did, the contouring did just what I expected
with no color shifting. Then I went back to my simple set and changed
PLOT to MAP_SET and nothing changed, no color shifting. So why, with a
more complicated data set, does it work differently depending on which
command, MAP_SET or PLOT, is used with CONTOUR?
> I do notice that most of the people who are experiencing
> map problems now are using (or moving from) IDL 4. Is there
> a general feeling among the people who use map projections
> that they are better in IDL 5?
>
The one map thing that I found works in 5 that didn't work correctly
in 4 is map_continents,/fill. Jean
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> David Fanning, Ph.D.
> Fanning Software Consulting
> E-Mail: davidf@dfanning.com
> Phone: 970-221-0438
> Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Trouble with IDL 5.0.2 (sunos sparc) map_set and contour [message #10826 is a reply to message #10805] |
Thu, 22 January 1998 00:00 |
Andy Loughe
Messages: 174
Registered: November 1995
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Fanning wrote:
> One might argue (as I am sure RSI would) that it actually
> worked *incorrectly* before and it works correctly now.
> But, no, I can't tell you what is going on. It would
> be helpful if RSI could provide a bit more explanation about
> these kinds of changes.
>
> I do notice that most of the people who are experiencing
> map problems now are using (or moving from) IDL 4. Is there
> a general feeling among the people who use map projections
> that they are better in IDL 5?
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
I am sticking with IDL 4 because I don't have the time or interest
to figure out again (I've been doing this since version 2.?) what
home-grown routines must be re-written to handle RSI's incompatible
backwards-compatability! I laugh every time they come out with a
new version of the software and promise 100% backwards compatability.
We aren't idiots... or are we?!
-----
Andrew F. Loughe |
afl@cdc.noaa.gov
University of Colorado, CIRES Box 449 |
http://cdc.noaa.gov/~afl
Boulder, CO 80309-0449 | phn:(303)492-0707
fax:(303)497-7013
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with
sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use."
-Galileo
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
