Re: voigt error... followup

From: John Houck <houck_at_email.domain.hidden>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 14:48:55 -0500
On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 13:50 -0500, rgibson_at_email.domain.hidden> I think I found the problem.  The voigt.vtherm parameter goes
> negative during the fits (because I allowed for a minimum value
> < 0 in set_par).  I think it wasn't obvious because fit_counts
> would crash before updating the vtherm parameter when it went
> negative.

In this case, "crash" is the wrong word isn't it?

For example, if a car's "check engine" light came on, it
wouldn't normally be called a "crash".

> Suggest robustifying voigt.vtherm and voigt.fwhm to not halt
> ISIS if evaluated when negative?
> Thanks,
> Rob

I don't think this would be an improvement.

When an attempt is made to evaluate a function outside its
valid domain, I think the function should generate a fairly
severe error.

For example, when computing a real-valued expression involving
sqrt(x), I think a severe error (an "exception") should be
generated when x<0. The exception serves as a warning that
something has gone very wrong.

For what it's worth, you can use slang's try/catch/finally
construct to handle exceptions of this nature.  For example,


You received this message because you are
subscribed to the isis-users list.
To unsubscribe, send a message to
isis-users-request_at_email.domain.hiddenwith the first line of the message as:
Received on Fri Nov 16 2007 - 14:49:04 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri May 02 2014 - 08:35:45 EDT