comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » IDL 8.0 compile

Home » Public Forums » archive » IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes

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

Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes [message #69257 is a reply to message #69187]

Thu, 24 December 2009 03:44

David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001

Senior Member

pp writes:

> As I said before, IDL currently has issues that already make its
> upgrade too difficult. It should not have a new obstacle. Keep in mind
> that the most frequent posters in this newsgroup are likely to be
> better informed of IDL's changes and better ways to write code, and
> more willing to make changes, than most IDL users. If idl2 becomes
> default, that majority of users may simply not understand why their
> code stopped working, and so keep using the older versions. And most
> of the well informed users know how inconvenient it is to keep
> limiting what they use in their new code because some if its users are
> still with an old version of IDL. And even if those people do not even
> know it, we can send them our files in the new standard and their
> relatively new compilers will understand it.

You are probably right. But even though it is Christmas
week, and I have suspended my usual cynicism for a few
days, recent events (say since at least IDL 6.1) have not
convinced me that ITTVIS does much of anything out of
concern for their plodding-behind, direct graphics brethren.
If they are willing to make a big break like this, I suspect
it has more to do with making sure those people *can't* keep
up than concern for their future. Changing the file extension
will simply explicitly spell out the doom that awaits those of us
who wants to stick with a *.pro extension.

At least with a compile option there is the illusion of hope.

Peace be unto the World!

Cheers,

David

--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: chris_torrence@NOSPAM on Fri, 18 December 2009 13:51
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: wlandsman on Mon, 28 December 2009 04:36
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: penteado on Sun, 27 December 2009 19:44
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: H. Evans on Sat, 26 December 2009 13:21
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: alt on Fri, 25 December 2009 02:30
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: penteado on Thu, 24 December 2009 08:49
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: wlandsman on Thu, 24 December 2009 05:07
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: David Fanning on Thu, 24 December 2009 03:44
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: penteado on Wed, 23 December 2009 22:13
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: David Fanning on Wed, 23 December 2009 20:48
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: proffmw@gmail.com on Wed, 23 December 2009 20:08
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: penteado on Wed, 06 January 2010 10:35
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: JDS on Fri, 08 January 2010 13:42
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Matt[2] on Wed, 06 January 2010 08:18
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Yngvar Larsen on Wed, 06 January 2010 07:29
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: David Fanning on Wed, 06 January 2010 07:13
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Yngvar Larsen on Wed, 06 January 2010 07:12
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Kenneth P. Bowman on Wed, 06 January 2010 06:52
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Yngvar Larsen on Wed, 06 January 2010 06:56
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Michael Galloy on Wed, 06 January 2010 13:52
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Maarten[1] on Wed, 06 January 2010 06:01
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Michael Galloy on Wed, 06 January 2010 13:25
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: penteado on Tue, 05 January 2010 15:54
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: JDS on Tue, 05 January 2010 14:41
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Paul Van Delst[1] on Thu, 07 January 2010 08:35
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: monkman on Tue, 05 January 2010 13:51
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: David Fanning on Tue, 05 January 2010 11:17
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: chris_torrence@NOSPAM on Tue, 05 January 2010 10:58
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: chris_torrence@NOSPAM on Tue, 05 January 2010 10:57
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: pgrigis on Tue, 05 January 2010 06:57
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: R.Bauer on Tue, 05 January 2010 06:09
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: David Fanning on Mon, 04 January 2010 11:58
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: chris_torrence@NOSPAM on Mon, 04 January 2010 11:41
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: R.Bauer on Mon, 04 January 2010 02:30
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Jeremy Bailin on Tue, 29 December 2009 21:31
		Ruby range operators? Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Paul Van Delst[1] on Fri, 08 January 2010 13:16
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: penteado on Fri, 08 January 2010 05:36
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Maarten[1] on Fri, 08 January 2010 04:19
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: H. Evans on Fri, 08 January 2010 01:29
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Michael Galloy on Thu, 07 January 2010 09:56
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: Maarten[1] on Thu, 07 January 2010 07:27
		Re: IDL 8.0 compile_opt changes By: wallabadah on Wed, 06 January 2010 16:30

Previous Topic:	Re: envi_title_bar.ico missing and null pointer dereferenced error when using .sav file in ENVI
Next Topic:	A routine to annotate PS files

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 09:03:45 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.32153 seconds