| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38920] |
Mon, 05 April 2004 06:38 |
R.Bauer
Messages: 1424
Registered: November 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mwvogel wrote:
> One way to overcome this would be to use the _EXTRA keyword. One of many
> options would be
>
> function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
> ;title=t,
> ;title1=t1
> FOR i=0,N_TAGS(e)-1 DO $
> CASE (TAG_NAMES(e))[i] OF
> 'TITLE' : t = e.title
> 'TITLE1': t1 = e.title1
> ENDCASE
> print, t, t1
> return, 0
> end
>
> Of course error checking should be performed. And full keywords should be
> used. For keyword completion, I think I once saw a post by Reimar Bauer on
> that topic.
This was a long thread
http://groups.google.de/groups?q=_extra+Reimar+group:comp.la ng.idl-pvwave&hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=comp. lang.idl-pvwave&selm=3B56828A.71B9D015%40fz-juelich.de&a mp;rnum=3
It is a way to get out of this rules but it is not quite easy to explain
someone how to call a routine which is written this way.
routine_info gives no result about keywords. auto writing of header
pages are impossible.
Until now we have a lot of routines where keyword inhiterance is used.
And it is quite easy to find the routine where the keywords are
explained and the others could use _extra, _strict_extra or _ref_extra.
Reimar
>
> "Oliver Thilmann" <justspam03@yahoo.de> schreef in bericht
> news:c992bd37.0404040539.3446cff@posting.google.com...
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the following piece of code:
>>
>>
>>> pro test
>>> y = testfunc( title=10, title1=20 )
>>> end
>>>
>>> function testfunc, title=t, title1=t1
>>> print, t, t1
>>> return, 0
>>> end
>>
>> results in the error message (IDL6.0):
>> % Ambiguous keyword abbreviation: TITLE.
>>
>> I don't see any ambiguity here. May I consider this a
>> (design-)bug, or is there some deeper meaning to this behaviour?
>> Regards
>> Oliver
>
>
>
--
Reimar Bauer
Institut fuer Stratosphaerische Chemie (ICG-I)
Forschungszentrum Juelich
email: R.Bauer@fz-juelich.de
------------------------------------------------------------ -------
a IDL library at ForschungsZentrum Juelich
http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-i/idl_icglib/idl_lib_intro. html
============================================================ =======
|
|
|
|
| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38921 is a reply to message #38920] |
Mon, 05 April 2004 06:10  |
R.Bauer
Messages: 1424
Registered: November 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
mwvogel wrote:
> Dear All/Craig,
>
>
>>> One way to overcome this would be to use the _EXTRA keyword. One of many
>>> options would be
>>>
>>> function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Greetings, it's true that one can use the _EXTRA keyword explicitly,
>> i.e. by directly passing a structure through _EXTRA. However, the
>> _EXTRA keyword processing still doesn't allow us to do the desired
>> thing, which is:
>>
>> testfunc, title='a', title1='b'
>
>
> Using the code below I get the following on my system
> IDL> print, !VERSION
> { x86 Win32 Windows 5.4 Sep 25 2000 32 64}
> IDL> help, testfunc( title='a', title1='b')
> ab
> <Expression> INT = 0
>
> I feel this code should work cross platform, but have not tested it. Of
> course Craig Markwardt and M. Katz were right pointing out that the explicit
> definition as originally requested will not work.
>
> code :
> function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
> ;title=t,
> ;title1=t1
> FOR i=0,N_TAGS(e)-1 DO $
> CASE (TAG_NAMES(e))[i] OF
> 'TITLE' : t = e.title
> 'TITLE1': t1 = e.title1
> ENDCASE
> print, t, t1
> return, 0
> end
>
>
This does only work if the keywords are completly written.
It would be bad to be forced to do it.
If you like to have different titles it is better to use different names
,e.g. legend_title, title, page_title.
You could group by a prefix like legend_ a whole bunch of keywords which
then could be extracted from the _extra structure easily and send to a
specific routine as e.g. title and so on.
I am using in this case extract_extra() from our library.
result=extract_extra(extra,'legend_*')
regards
Reimar
--
Reimar Bauer
Institut fuer Stratosphaerische Chemie (ICG-I)
Forschungszentrum Juelich
email: R.Bauer@fz-juelich.de
------------------------------------------------------------ -------
a IDL library at ForschungsZentrum Juelich
http://www.fz-juelich.de/icg/icg-i/idl_icglib/idl_lib_intro. html
============================================================ =======
|
|
|
|
| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38924 is a reply to message #38921] |
Mon, 05 April 2004 04:47 |
mwvogel
Messages: 9
Registered: February 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Dear All/Craig,
>> One way to overcome this would be to use the _EXTRA keyword. One of many
>> options would be
>>
>> function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
> ...
>
> Greetings, it's true that one can use the _EXTRA keyword explicitly,
> i.e. by directly passing a structure through _EXTRA. However, the
> _EXTRA keyword processing still doesn't allow us to do the desired
> thing, which is:
>
> testfunc, title='a', title1='b'
Using the code below I get the following on my system
IDL> print, !VERSION
{ x86 Win32 Windows 5.4 Sep 25 2000 32 64}
IDL> help, testfunc( title='a', title1='b')
ab
<Expression> INT = 0
I feel this code should work cross platform, but have not tested it. Of
course Craig Markwardt and M. Katz were right pointing out that the explicit
definition as originally requested will not work.
code :
function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
;title=t,
;title1=t1
FOR i=0,N_TAGS(e)-1 DO $
CASE (TAG_NAMES(e))[i] OF
'TITLE' : t = e.title
'TITLE1': t1 = e.title1
ENDCASE
print, t, t1
return, 0
end
|
|
|
|
| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38926 is a reply to message #38924] |
Mon, 05 April 2004 02:47 |
Craig Markwardt
Messages: 1869
Registered: November 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"mwvogel" <mvogel@rdiag.fgg.eur.nl> writes:
> One way to overcome this would be to use the _EXTRA keyword. One of many
> options would be
>
> function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
...
Greetings, it's true that one can use the _EXTRA keyword explicitly,
i.e. by directly passing a structure through _EXTRA. However, the
_EXTRA keyword processing still doesn't allow us to do the desired
thing, which is:
testfunc, title='a', title1='b'
Yours,
Craig
--
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
Craig B. Markwardt, Ph.D. EMAIL: craigmnet@REMOVEcow.physics.wisc.edu
Astrophysics, IDL, Finance, Derivatives | Remove "net" for better response
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
|
|
|
|
| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38928 is a reply to message #38926] |
Mon, 05 April 2004 01:48 |
mwvogel
Messages: 9
Registered: February 2003
|
Junior Member |
|
|
One way to overcome this would be to use the _EXTRA keyword. One of many
options would be
function testfunc, _EXTRA=e
;title=t,
;title1=t1
FOR i=0,N_TAGS(e)-1 DO $
CASE (TAG_NAMES(e))[i] OF
'TITLE' : t = e.title
'TITLE1': t1 = e.title1
ENDCASE
print, t, t1
return, 0
end
Of course error checking should be performed. And full keywords should be
used. For keyword completion, I think I once saw a post by Reimar Bauer on
that topic.
"Oliver Thilmann" <justspam03@yahoo.de> schreef in bericht
news:c992bd37.0404040539.3446cff@posting.google.com...
> Hi,
>
> the following piece of code:
>
>> pro test
>> y = testfunc( title=10, title1=20 )
>> end
>>
>> function testfunc, title=t, title1=t1
>> print, t, t1
>> return, 0
>> end
>
> results in the error message (IDL6.0):
> % Ambiguous keyword abbreviation: TITLE.
>
> I don't see any ambiguity here. May I consider this a
> (design-)bug, or is there some deeper meaning to this behaviour?
> Regards
> Oliver
|
|
|
|
| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38930 is a reply to message #38928] |
Sun, 04 April 2004 18:10 |
MKatz843
Messages: 98
Registered: March 2002
|
Member |
|
|
This bug most often bites me when I use really short keywords. For
example, I like using "N" for the number of somethings, but doing so
pretty much invalidates any other possible keyword beginning with the
letter N. For example, in this procedure
pro test444, N=N, Napkin=Napkin
print, 'April 4, 2004'
end
calling
IDL> test444, N=5
causes the aforementioned "% Ambiguous keyword abbreviation" error. I
think we're stuck with this one.
M. Katz
|
|
|
|
| Re: Keyword abbreviation ambiguities [message #38931 is a reply to message #38930] |
Sun, 04 April 2004 08:07 |
Craig Markwardt
Messages: 1869
Registered: November 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
justspam03@yahoo.de (Oliver Thilmann) writes:
>> function testfunc, title=t, title1=t1
...
> I don't see any ambiguity here. May I consider this a
> (design-)bug, or is there some deeper meaning to this behaviour?
You may consider it a design bug -- I do -- but RSI does not. The
ambiguity is that TITLE "could be" a shortened version of TITLE1.
This has been discussed on the newsgroup, and most people agreed that
the desired behavior is that if there is an exact keyword match, there
should be no ambiguity error. Unfortunately, with the way that IDL
presently works, there is no way for you to get your program working
with those two keywords.
Craig
--
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
Craig B. Markwardt, Ph.D. EMAIL: craigmnet@REMOVEcow.physics.wisc.edu
Astrophysics, IDL, Finance, Derivatives | Remove "net" for better response
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
