ROUTINE_NAMES [message #3665] |
Tue, 07 March 1995 15:29  |
thompson
Messages: 584 Registered: August 1991
|
Senior Member |
|
|
We're using an undocumented routine called ROUTINE_NAMES to retrieve the names
of IDL routines. For example,
f_name = ROUTINE_NAMES(/s_functions)
p_name = ROUTINE_NAMES(/s_procedures)
internal = [f_name, p_name]
We use this to assist the user in determining whether or not a routine is
internal or not, and whether or not a proposed routine name will conflict with
anything already defined, either internal or in the path.
Does anybody else use this feature, or think that it is useful? If the
consensus is that this is a good thing, I would like to ask RSI to upgrade this
to be documented, so that we know it will not go away in a future release.
I've been told that this feature is also available in PV-Wave.
Bill Thompson
|
|
|
Re: ROUTINE_NAMES [message #3781 is a reply to message #3665] |
Fri, 10 March 1995 08:42  |
thompson
Messages: 584 Registered: August 1991
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Earlier, I wrote:
> We're using an undocumented routine called ROUTINE_NAMES to retrieve the names
> of IDL routines. For example,
> f_name = ROUTINE_NAMES(/s_functions)
> p_name = ROUTINE_NAMES(/s_procedures)
> internal = [f_name, p_name]
> We use this to assist the user in determining whether or not a routine is
> internal or not, and whether or not a proposed routine name will conflict with
> anything already defined, either internal or in the path.
> Does anybody else use this feature, or think that it is useful? If the
> consensus is that this is a good thing, I would like to ask RSI to upgrade this
> to be documented, so that we know it will not go away in a future release.
> I've been told that this feature is also available in PV-Wave.
I've gotten email from several people saying that they thought that this
feature was useful. I find it gratifying, but point out that RSI won't see
your opinion if you don't also post it or send them a copy.
Bill Thompson
|
|
|