comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1

Home » Public Forums » archive » Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1

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

Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 [message #76339 is a reply to message #76218]

Wed, 25 May 2011 07:34

pgrigis
Messages: 436
Registered: September 2007

Senior Member

On May 25, 5:58 am, ameigs <andyme...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 25, 9:42 am, FÖLDY Lajos <fo...@rmki.kfki.hu> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Tue, 24 May 2011, David Fanning wrote:
>>> FÖLDY Lajos writes:
>
>>>> Probably IDL does not know about your image function and tries to
>>>> subscript the image variable. Does compile_opt idl2 help?
>
>>> Well, this occurs in a fresh IDL session, so image
>>> is undefined. I've also checked to be sure no procedures
>>> or functions named "image" are defined.
>
>>> IDL> .reset
>>> IDL> .compile -v 'C:\IDL\default\junk.pro'
>
>>> img = image(image, /current)
>>> ^
>>> % Syntax error.
>>> At: C:\IDL\default\junk.pro, Line 4
>>> % 1 Compilation error(s) in module $MAIN$.
>
>>> Yes, Compile_Opt idl2 helps and seems to solve
>>> the problem. Yet one more reason (if we need one!)
>>> that this should finally be the default behavior!
>
>>> The fact that I know how to work-around the problem
>>> (naming my image "bob" also solves the problem!) doesn't
>>> give me much satisfaction. What do you suppose the
>>> problem is?
>
>> The problem is that image() is ambiguous, it can be a function call or a
>> variable subscript. IDL must choose after reading the tokens 'image' '('.
>> I guess the rules are:
>
>> - if the image function is defined, it is a function call
>
>> - if the image variable is defined, it is a subscript
>
>> - if the image function can be resolved using !PATH, it is a function call
>
>> - it is a subscript
>
>> (here defined means defined in the internal tables of the compiler)
>
>> I think we have to live with it. "bob" or compile_opt idl2 (strictarray)
>> removes the ambiguity. Probably IDL should add an -idl2 command line
>> switch to make it default globally.
>
>> regards,
>> Lajos
>
> Know you're trying to help, but ever heard of the "teaching an old dog
> to suck eggs". David is finding unexpected problems and well he is one
> of 5 experts that I know of in IDL. Sorry, I can't test this
> behaviour; my lab is stuck currently at IDL 7.1.1....
>
> Andy

Andy, Lajos wrote an IDL clone from scratch and therefore is
probably more experienced then anybody else about rules regarding
how IDL statements are compiled (or how they *should* be....)

Ciao,
Paolo

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: David Fanning on Tue, 24 May 2011 08:24
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: David Fanning on Wed, 25 May 2011 07:58
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: pgrigis on Wed, 25 May 2011 07:34
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: pgrigis on Wed, 25 May 2011 07:32
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: David Fanning on Wed, 25 May 2011 05:32
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: Foldy Lajos on Wed, 25 May 2011 04:52
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: ameigs on Wed, 25 May 2011 02:58
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: Foldy Lajos on Wed, 25 May 2011 01:42
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: ben.bighair on Tue, 24 May 2011 18:22
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: David Fanning on Tue, 24 May 2011 14:28
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: Foldy Lajos on Tue, 24 May 2011 13:21
		Re: Happy Reasons to use IDL 8.1 By: David Fanning on Tue, 24 May 2011 13:14

Previous Topic:	graphics window
Next Topic:	command in matlab analogous to scope_varname?

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 17:52:41 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00418 seconds