comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: will RSI support HDF5?

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: will RSI support HDF5?

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

Re: will RSI support HDF5? [message #26526 is a reply to message #26525]

Mon, 10 September 2001 08:39

David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001

Senior Member

Jason Li (jylimd@yahoo.com) writes:

> Does anyone has inside scoop on RSI's support of the new HDF5?

I don't have any inside scoop. But here is
a little tutorial for you on the subject:

1. Will RSI support HDF5?

Of course. RSI is in the data visualization business.
A huge amount of data is in HDF format. They have no
choice but to support it.

2. When will such support be in IDL?

About 6 months after you wanted it.

3. Why will support be delayed like this? My thesis
is due Tuesday!

Incorporating other people's software into your own
is a dirty, painful business. Mostly because that
software is shamefully under-documented and full of bugs.
It takes a certain amount of time and a great deal of
effort to sort through everything. And you have to
blend that effort with your own release schedule. It
all takes time. Usually more time than you hoped. And
you can bet more time than your customers wanted.

Cheers,

David
--
David W. Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting
Phone: 970-221-0438, E-mail: david@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: will RSI support HDF5? By: R.Bauer on Mon, 10 September 2001 08:36
		Re: will RSI support HDF5? By: David Fanning on Mon, 10 September 2001 08:39
		Re: will RSI support HDF5? By: hcp on Mon, 10 September 2001 10:06

Previous Topic:	Re: object graphics to postcript and how to copy an object tree
Next Topic:	unloading a dlm...

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 10:34:08 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.12182 seconds