comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: SIZE() vs. N

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS()

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS() [message #67324 is a reply to message #67323]

Thu, 16 July 2009 12:59

wlandsman
Messages: 743
Registered: June 2000

Senior Member

On Jul 16, 2:39 pm, wlandsman <wlands...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there any situation now where
> one must use SIZE() to get the number of elements rather than
> N_ELEMENTS().

Immediately after posting I realized that the answer to the above
question is "yes". In the following code using ASSOC(), N_Elements(a)
equals 1, but size(a,/N_elements) equals 2. --Wayne

b = {a:indgen(10),b:fltarr(100)}
openw,lun,'test.dat',/get_lun
writeu,lun,replicate(b,12)
close,lun

openr,lun,'test.dat'
c = replicate(b,2)
a = assoc(lun,c)
print,size(a,/n_elements)
print,N_elements(a)

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS() By: Craig Markwardt on Sat, 18 July 2009 02:40
		Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS() By: wlandsman on Thu, 16 July 2009 13:25
		Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS() By: David Fanning on Thu, 16 July 2009 13:11
		Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS() By: David Fanning on Thu, 16 July 2009 13:04
		Re: SIZE() vs. N_ELEMENTS() By: wlandsman on Thu, 16 July 2009 12:59

Previous Topic:	Best form factor for a NetCDF package of a dataset
Next Topic:	Re: Linear fit with user defined weights

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 07:54:13 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.11858 seconds