comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6

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

Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 [message #34079 is a reply to message #34077]

Wed, 19 February 2003 07:54

Dick Jackson
Messages: 347
Registered: August 1998

Senior Member

"Reimar Bauer" <R.Bauer@fz-juelich.de> wrote in message
news:3E539FE4.4000801@fz-juelich.de...
> Hi,
>
> today I found a difference in handling infite numbers by the new
version.
>
>
> IDL 5.6
>
> IDL> a=1./0 &print,a,fix(a)
> Inf -32768
>
>
> IDL 5.5
>
> IDL> a=1./0 &print,a,fix(a)
> Inf 0
>
>
>
> So I can't say which is right both results are terrible.
>
> Now it is totally clear that this case must be tested.

I don't see any change in behaviour on Windows 2000 Pro; in 5.4, 5.5 and
5.6, I get these identical results:

IDL> a=1./0 &print,a,fix(a)
Inf 0
% Program caused arithmetic error: Floating divide by 0
% Program caused arithmetic error: Floating illegal operand

Cheers,
--
-Dick

Dick Jackson / dick@d-jackson.com
D-Jackson Software Consulting / http://www.d-jackson.com
Calgary, Alberta, Canada / +1-403-242-7398 / Fax: 241-7392

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 By: R.G. Stockwell on Wed, 19 February 2003 10:17
		Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 By: K. Bowman on Wed, 19 February 2003 09:26
		Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 By: Paul Van Delst[1] on Wed, 19 February 2003 08:56
		Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 By: R.Bauer on Wed, 19 February 2003 08:33
		Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 By: Dick Jackson on Wed, 19 February 2003 07:54
		Re: differences idl5.5 and idl5.6 By: R.Bauer on Thu, 20 February 2003 01:01

Previous Topic:	Re: Check if coordinate is in array
Next Topic:	running out of memory! can all memory be restored in idl?

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Dec 05 08:05:44 PST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01335 seconds