On Mon, Dec 13, 2004 at 14:02 -0500, John E. Davis wrote: > David P. Huenemoerder <dph_at_email.domain.hidden> > isis> define dummy_fit(){ return 1; } > > isis> add_slang_function("dummy", ["a","b","c"], [0:2] ); > > Norm indices must be numbered from 1 <= n <= N > [...] > >I think the help file should state that the indices are NOT array > >indices, but the logical parameter indices, starting at 1: > > Alternatively, the interface could use the 0-based array indices for > the specification of the normalization parameters, as you originally > assumed. In fact, I think that this is better anyway since using the > "parameter indices" as given by list_par assumes something about how > isis determines those values. IMO, it is better not to expose this > internal convention as part of the interface. > The indices don't assume anything about how isis determines those values -- they're simply 1-based indices. However, because S-Lang arrays are 0-based and because the mechanism for setting default parameter values uses 0-based indexing, I agree that it makes more sense to use 0-based indexing here. The next release (isis-1.2.5) will use this behavior. Thanks, -JohnReceived on Fri Dec 24 2004 - 06:15:01 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Mar 15 2007 - 08:45:50 EDT