| Re: idl 6.3, cdf_epoch16 keyword to cdf_varcreate [message #49084] |
Mon, 12 June 2006 13:35 |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Lajos writes:
> IMHO, the interpreter should search for an exact match first, and look for
> abbreviations only if an exact match can not be found. CDF_EPOCH is an
> exact match, so it should not generate an error message.
Excellent idea! Unfortunately, that's not how it works. :-(
I would think this is a bug, pure and simple.
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl 6.3, cdf_epoch16 keyword to cdf_varcreate [message #49085 is a reply to message #49084] |
Mon, 12 June 2006 13:10  |
Foldy Lajos
Messages: 268
Registered: October 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
IMHO, the interpreter should search for an exact match first, and look for
abbreviations only if an exact match can not be found. CDF_EPOCH is an
exact match, so it should not generate an error message.
regards,
lajos
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Martin Rother wrote:
>
> Hi Gurus,
>
> today one of my colleagues raised the simple question about
> the 'CDF_EPOCH'/'CDF_EPOCH16' optional keywords of 'CDF_VARCREATE'.
>
> this, indeed, seems ambiguous for my (may be limited) understanding
> of the way the interpreter is handling keywords.
>
> have I accidentially missed something in the documentation,
> or is there some trick to avoid the
>
> % Ambiguous keyword abbreviation: CDF_EPOCH.
>
> error message?
>
> hints welcome,
> best regards,
> martin.
>
> --
> Martin Rother (rother@gfz-potsdam.de) +331 / 288-1272 Section 2.3
> GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam, Germany
>
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
