Re: On-the-fly compilation of routines [message #63518 is a reply to message #63334] |
Fri, 07 November 2008 05:03  |
R.Bauer
Messages: 1424 Registered: November 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Fanning schrieb:
> Reimar Bauer writes:
>
>> Andrew Cool schrieb:
>>>> mean is a idl source function. You can open it by .edit mean on the idl input line.
>>> Well I'll be!!
>>>
>>> 17 years programming in IDL and I never knew this.
>>>
>>> What else don't I know? I'll go ask my wife - she'll tell me... ;-)
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>
>> Hi Andrew!
>>
>> On the other hand I know you know things I don't know, that's why I love
>> since several years this group.
>
> This reminds me of a discussion we had several weeks ago that
> I forgot to follow up on. Someone was trying to compile a large
> program project with a script that did a .COMPILE on his files.
> This worked fine in some earlier version of IDL, but had the
> effect of opening hundreds of edit windows in later versions.
>
> I happened to ask about this when I was around some ITTVIS types
> who were likely to know the answer. It turns out that .COMPILE
> is now the equivalent to the command sequence .RUN/.EDIT. And
> that what the person needed to do was replace all his .COMPILE
> commands with .RUN.
>
> This sort of turns the .COMPILE command back on its head,
> since I originally argued for it on the basis that no one
> outside of RSI could figure out why .RUN only compiled and
> didn't run anything, and that is why we needed a .COMPILE
> command.
>
> Anyway, I suppose when your institutional memory leaves the
> company, it's easy to forget why you did things originally. :-)
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
indeed that is a stupid misbehaviour of idl 7.0 again. luckily it does
not crash the idl shell (because of a missing edit window).
In the past the .run dot command was used to compile and execute main
programs. There was no difference between the shell and the ide.
Now it behaves this way only if you don't use the ide :(
Reimar
|
|
|