comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL

Home » Public Forums » archive » Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ?

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

Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? [message #90266 is a reply to message #90265]

Mon, 16 February 2015 10:47

lecacheux.alain
Messages: 325
Registered: January 2008

Senior Member

Le lundi 16 février 2015 18:14:07 UTC+1, Chris Torrence a écrit :
> On Sunday, February 15, 2015 at 10:35:50 AM UTC-7, alx wrote:
>> Le dimanche 15 février 2015 17:33:32 UTC+1, Chris Torrence a écrit :
>>> On Saturday, February 14, 2015 at 12:51:23 PM UTC-7, alx wrote:
>>>> Le samedi 14 février 2015 20:17:22 UTC+1, Matthew Argall a écrit :
>>>> > See this discussion.
>>>> >
>>>> > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.idl-pvwave /RWNh8htf8Rw
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the tip. I know this discussion.
>>>> But in my case, the IDL versions for SAVE, RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore are homogeneous as being 8.4.
>>>> And the main question is: why a behavior difference between RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ?
>>>>
>>>> alx.
>>>
>>> Hi alx,
>>>
>>> Are you sure that you don't have an old IDL version on your path? When IDL restores the save file, it will try to load the list code, to make sure it is in sync with the latest version. If you have an old version on IDL's path, it will accidentally pick that up and that will lead to problems.
>>>
>>> -Chris
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>> The used machine is a freshly installed one so that I am sure that there is only one IDL (8.4) on it.
>> { x86_64 Win32 Windows Microsoft Windows 8.4 Sep 27 2014 64 64}
>> After a machine reboot the problem disappeared: RESTORE is now restoring correctly.
>> Before the machine reboot, I just restarted each time the IDL session.
>> Can we imagine that some error in managing LIST variables inside the first session (loaded DLL or something else) could have permanently affected the other following sessions ?
>> I suspect the construct "list1 += list_", used in a large loop, when building at first the lists variables.
>>
>> alain.
>
> Well, I can imagine a lot. :-) But I've never heard of this happening... Anyway, it sounds like you solved the problem, so unless it occurs again, I would just pretend that it never happened...
>
> Cheers,
> Chris

Ok. Forget it.
But I must also say that I never had any problem with IDL Save/Restore, while using IDL since several decades (since V2.0 on PDP11).
Whence my surprise...
alx.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: lecacheux.alain on Sat, 14 February 2015 11:13
		Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: Matthew Argall on Sat, 14 February 2015 11:17
		Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: lecacheux.alain on Sat, 14 February 2015 11:51
		Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: chris_torrence@NOSPAM on Sun, 15 February 2015 08:33
		Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: lecacheux.alain on Sun, 15 February 2015 09:35
		Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: chris_torrence@NOSPAM on Mon, 16 February 2015 09:14
		Re: Different behavior of RESTORE and IDL_SaveFile::Restore ? By: lecacheux.alain on Mon, 16 February 2015 10:47

Previous Topic:	Bridge Logging = OFF not working using the Java Bridge
Next Topic:	recursive search in a dictionary

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 15:57:06 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00403 seconds