| IDL Limits [message #4790] |
Tue, 25 July 1995 00:00  |
mallozzi
Messages: 60
Registered: August 1994
|
Member |
|
|
Reading some recent posts about IDL limits, here is a list off the
top of my head. Please post any additions or corrections.
IDL limits:
local variables <236 (?)
common block variables <64
pro/function parameters <64
CALL_EXTERNAL parameters <64
structure tags <126 (?)
variables (v3.5.1 & earlier) <16 characters
pro/func names (?)
-Bob
mallozzi@ssl.msfc.nasa.gov
|
|
|
|
| Re: IDL limits [message #12459 is a reply to message #4790] |
Tue, 04 August 1998 00:00  |
mirko_vukovic
Messages: 50
Registered: January 1998
|
Member |
|
|
In article <35C63C37.C3103D4B@wellesley.edu>,
rfrench@mediaone.net wrote:
> Robert S. Mallozzi wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
> stuff deleted
>
> Robert - One limit that I have run up against and can't find
> documentation for relates to KEYWORD names. I tried to define
> keywords XMIN_ABSOLUTE and XMIN_RELATIVE, say, and got
> an error message about ambiguous keyword definitions. Can someone point
> me to the documentation on unique keyword recognition? I have gotten
> around this by using different names, but it would be nice to
> know the rules of the game!
>
> Dick French
>
I usually get an error message under those circumstances when I forget about
the two similar keywords, and then call the routine with Xmin=... . Thus, are
you sure that you are calling the routine and specifying unambiguously (that
hurt) the keywords?
mirko
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
|
|
|
|
| Re: IDL limits [message #12461 is a reply to message #4790] |
Mon, 03 August 1998 00:00 |
davidf
Messages: 2866
Registered: September 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dick French writes in response to Bob Mallozzi:
> Robert - One limit that I have run up against and can't find
> documentation for relates to KEYWORD names. I tried to define
> keywords XMIN_ABSOLUTE and XMIN_RELATIVE, say, and got
> an error message about ambiguous keyword definitions. Can someone point
> me to the documentation on unique keyword recognition? I have gotten
> around this by using different names, but it would be nice to
> know the rules of the game!
Dick, your description of the problem seems highly unlikely.
If you had defined a procedure with these two keywords, like
this:
PRO JUNK, XMIN_Absolute=absolute, XMIN_Relative=relative
there would be absolutely (pun intended) no problem. Where
you MIGHT run into a problem is if you called the procedure
like this:
JUNK, XMIN=5
In this case, you WOULD get an error message about ambiguous
keyword definitions because IDL would not have enough letters
to distinguish between the two keywords in the "keyword table"
that gets created when the procedure is compiled. You must
use enough keyword letters in the keyword name to identify that
keyword unambiguously.
For example, if you had named the keywords Absolute_XMin and
Relative_XMin, you could call the procedure like this:
JUNK, A=5
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: IDL limits [message #12465 is a reply to message #4790] |
Mon, 03 August 1998 00:00 |
Richard G. French
Messages: 65
Registered: June 1997
|
Member |
|
|
Robert S. Mallozzi wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I thought I read somewhere that IDL 5 removed all
> parameter limits, but I can't find it anywhere in
> the docs. I see that there are still some limits
> imposed:
>
Robert - One limit that I have run up against and can't find
documentation for relates to KEYWORD names. I tried to define
keywords XMIN_ABSOLUTE and XMIN_RELATIVE, say, and got
an error message about ambiguous keyword definitions. Can someone point
me to the documentation on unique keyword recognition? I have gotten
around this by using different names, but it would be nice to
know the rules of the game!
Dick French
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
