comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6

Home » Public Forums » archive » no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6

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

Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 [message #34307 is a reply to message #34266]

Fri, 28 February 2003 12:35

JD Smith
Messages: 850
Registered: December 1999

Senior Member

On Fri, 28 Feb 2003 13:12:17 -0700, William Thompson wrote:

> Pavel Romashkin <pavel_romashkin@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> Why is EXECUTE used in this program? Why can't the value just be
>> returned from each CASE? Execute will slow it down and as far as I can
>> tell, does nothing special. There is no code that follows the CASE to
>> prevent you from returning at any point. Will it not compile in 5.4 with
>> the extra keyword? I thought keyword mismatches are runtime errors. Am I
>> missing something?
>> Pavel
>
>
> Yes, without the execute statement, it will not compile in versions
> earlier than 5.4. You get the error message
>
> IDL> .run atan_complex_wrapper
>
> (version GE 5.6): returnValue = ATAN(complexNum, /Phase)
> ^
> % Keyword parameters not allowed in call.
> At: /disk1/thompson/atan_complex_wrapper.pro, Line 12
> % 1 Compilation errors in module ATAN_COMPLEX_WRAPPER.
>
> However, only the last execute statement is actually required. The
> first two, without the new keyword, can be direct statements.
>

Aha! Another conspiracy laid to rest. IDL apparently checks whether
zero, or more than zero keywords are allowed.

Try compiling:

pro foo
empty,/FOO
end

and you'll see what I mean. Since ATAN went from having zero to more
than zero keywords, this explains it. The compile vs. runtime
handling of keywords (perverse as it is) has remained unchanged.

JD

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: Alexander Rauscher on Thu, 27 February 2003 04:52
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: JD Smith on Mon, 03 March 2003 09:12
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: David Fanning on Fri, 28 February 2003 20:40
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: Craig Markwardt on Fri, 28 February 2003 18:20
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: David Fanning on Fri, 28 February 2003 15:55
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: Pavel Romashkin on Fri, 28 February 2003 15:32
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: JD Smith on Fri, 28 February 2003 12:35
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: David Fanning on Fri, 28 February 2003 12:28
		Re: no backwards compatibility in IDL 5.6 By: JD Smith on Fri, 28 February 2003 12:02

Previous Topic:	Re: 2 questions about .sav files
Next Topic:	Re: writing ascii files (with really long lines...)

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 23:06:57 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.20151 seconds