On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Tim Jenness wrote:
> PDA_DRNOR.f is more interesting because THERE IS NO CORRESPONDING PDA
> VERSION OF THIS ROUTINE. Excuse me? It looks like Peter intended for this
> to be put into the PDA library but it didn't happen. Can pda_drnor.f
> simply be moved into the PDA library and out of PISA?
Yes, I think I kept it because it is very fast and double precision, but
didn't think seriously about committing it because it doesn't match the
suite of existing functions in PDA, i.e. it wasn't just a double precision
version of PDA_RNNOR. For that reason I'd keep this on the quiet side. You
might also notice that GAIA and CCDPACK also have copies of this routine.
CCDPACK also has a PDA_DSVDC routine that might warrant a move (don't
remember the genesis of that one).
Peter.
|