| Re: !p.symsize [message #23494] |
Thu, 25 January 2001 17:22 |
Mark Hadfield
Messages: 783
Registered: May 1995
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"David Fanning" <davidf@dfanning.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.14da66563fd1b5f5989d35@news.frii.com...
[Re RSI lurkers]
> I'm afraid this may be the case. It's not
> really their responsibility to fix bugs until
> you report them.
And even then...
There's a bug in the netCDF library's treatment of the STRIDE keyword that
was reported and logged over a year ago and still hasn't been fixed.
There that should flush one or two of them out.
---
Mark Hadfield
m.hadfield@niwa.cri.nz http://katipo.niwa.cri.nz/~hadfield/
National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research
PO Box 14-901, Wellington, New Zealand
|
|
|
|
| Re: !p.symsize [message #23497 is a reply to message #23494] |
Thu, 25 January 2001 15:36  |
davidf
Messages: 2866
Registered: September 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mark Fardal (fardal@weka.astro.umass.edu) writes:
> these lurkers are often mentioned. do we have empirical evidence that
> they exist?
I think they are a myth. The only time I ever feel their
presence is in that sort of hair-on-the-back-of-your-neck
way that you sometimes feel when you imagine your stern old
grandmother is there looking over your shoulder. But that's only
when I say something unflattering about IDL on the newsgroup,
which is almost never. :-)
> Or is a widespread irrational belief in their existence
> and efficacy perhaps responsible for the unfortunate persistence of IDL bugs?
I'm afraid this may be the case. It's not
really their responsibility to fix bugs until
you report them. I feel the same way about
the IDL programs I make available on my web page.
To think otherwise is to doom yourself to a life
of grind and drudgery.
> Lurkers, feel free to de-lurk here. It would be as exciting as God
> deciding to present unambigous proof of her existence. (well, not quite.)
Indeed. But recent conversations with a few of them
convinces me its not going to happen. To bad, in my
view, because we could all use their insights.
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting
Phone: 970-221-0438 E-Mail: davidf@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155
|
|
|
|
| Re: !p.symsize [message #23498 is a reply to message #23497] |
Thu, 25 January 2001 15:29 |
dirk
Messages: 15
Registered: March 1998
|
Junior Member |
|
|
In article <7v8znzxluh.fsf@weka.phast.umass.edu>,
Mark Fardal <fardal@weka.astro.umass.edu> wrote:
>> David Fanning wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S. I assume you will be filing a bug report with
>>> the folks at RSI. :-)>
>
>> I'd assume the lurkers have already taken care of it as we write this :-)
>>
>> Pavel
>
> these lurkers are often mentioned. do we have empirical evidence that
> they exist? or is a widespread irrational belief in their existence
> and efficacy perhaps responsible for the unfortunate persistence of IDL bugs?
>
> lurkers, feel free to de-lurk here. It would be as exciting as God
> deciding to present unambigous proof of her existence. (well, not quite.)
We exist. However, I doubt that we frequently submit bug reports to RSI.
- Dirk
ps. Hi JD!
|
|
|
|
| Re: !p.symsize [message #23499 is a reply to message #23498] |
Thu, 25 January 2001 15:17 |
Mark Fardal
Messages: 51
Registered: October 1995
|
Member |
|
|
> David Fanning wrote:
>>
>> P.S. I assume you will be filing a bug report with
>> the folks at RSI. :-)>
> I'd assume the lurkers have already taken care of it as we write this :-)
>
> Pavel
>
these lurkers are often mentioned. do we have empirical evidence that
they exist? or is a widespread irrational belief in their existence
and efficacy perhaps responsible for the unfortunate persistence of IDL bugs?
lurkers, feel free to de-lurk here. It would be as exciting as God
deciding to present unambigous proof of her existence. (well, not quite.)
Mark
|
|
|
|
| Re: !p.symsize [message #23503 is a reply to message #23499] |
Thu, 25 January 2001 12:16 |
Pavel A. Romashkin
Messages: 531
Registered: November 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'd assume the lurkers have already taken care of it as we write this :-)
Pavel
David Fanning wrote:
>
> P.S. I assume you will be filing a bug report with
> the folks at RSI. :-)>
|
|
|
|
| Re: !p.symsize [message #23504 is a reply to message #23503] |
Thu, 25 January 2001 12:09 |
davidf
Messages: 2866
Registered: September 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mark Fardal (fardal@weka.astro.umass.edu) writes:
>
> I thought I would be smart and set the symbol size once instead of typing
> it every time. and I thought I knew just how to do it. then I found:
>
> SYMSIZE exists as a field in the !P system variable
> it has no effect on the symbol size in the plot
> it is not in the documentation of !P.
>
> This is in IDL 5.2.1L on Unix. Do you guys have the same behavior
> with your swanky new versions? Did !p.symsize ever exist as a
> standard feature? Or have my attempts to access it just called it
> into (ineffective) existence on my machine, like an ineptly made golem?
Yikes! No it doesn't work here in IDL 5.4 Windows either.
Oddly, SYMSIZE is not listed as a field of !P in
the IDL 5.4 on-line help, although it is clearly
there in the structure and it gets set properly:
IDL> !P.Symsize=4
IDL> Help, !P, /Structure
This looks to me like one of those "Oh, I'll fix
that in a minute" errors that sometimes escape
completion. :-(
Cheers,
David
P.S. I assume you will be filing a bug report with
the folks at RSI. :-)
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting
Phone: 970-221-0438 E-Mail: davidf@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
