| int_2D and int_3D [message #56959] |
Mon, 26 November 2007 01:41 |
Geoff.Cureton
Messages: 1
Registered: November 2007
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Hi all,
I am trying to use int_2D and int_3D, and understand their
behaviour so I can properly write the functions that I am trying to
integrate.
From the IDL help for int_2D, it appears that I am required to return
a vector of function values using a single x value and a vector of y
values. Printing out the x and y values passed to the function seems
to bear this out.
Printing out the values passed to my 3D function (when using int_3D)
indicates a vector of z values for single x and y values, which I
concede has a certain symmetry with the int_2D routine. However, the
IDL help for int_3D gives the impression that the 3D function being
integrated only need return a scalar result for a single (x,y,z)
triple.
A simple test case I did for int_3D, where I wrote the function under
the assumption that I only needed to return a scalar, worked anyway,
perhaps by accident, i.e. if my function is of the form...
f(x,y,z) = x + y + z,
and I pass it scalar x and y, and a vector z, IDL seems to be able to
return a vector result f(x,y,z[])[] without any special coding on my
part.
Am I missing something? I would grateful if someone could share their
insights regarding the similarities/differences of int_2D and int_3D,
and the correct usage of each.
Cheers,
Geoff
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
