On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Peter W. Draper wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Tim Jenness wrote:
>
> > This would seem to suggest that we should have the bad value definitions
> > in a single place and that PRIMDAT should be that place. Would it be
> > problematic if HDS started using primdat? (and the HDS routines to
> > determine all that great stuff in the HDS datestamp file simply became
> > part of primdat)?
>
> It has to be the other way around. PRIMDAT must mirror what HDS uses.
>
So HDS should install a cut down version of PRM_PAR itself for bad values
(hds_par?) and PRM_PAR should then include that for bad value definitions?
--
Tim Jenness
JAC software
http://www.jach.hawaii.edu/~timj
|