2008/10/23 Peter W. Draper <[log in to unmask]>:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, David Berry wrote:
>
>>> The problem seems to come down to the old issue of verifying that the
>>> system and units of a SpecFrame are consistent. Nothing seems to work
>>> anymore, like trying to find a SpecFrame (what I seem to do), or
>>> reconstructing a SpecFrame with the full attributes (like in
>>> DIPSO:rdndf.f):
>>>
>>> % atools
>>> % astspecframe options='"system=wave,unit=Hz"' result=specframe.ast
>>>
>>> Got a good way to check that a SpecFrame is valid?
>>>
>>> Peter.
>>>
>>
>> When you say "Nothing seems to work anymore," do you mean that you've
>> seen some change in behaviour? If so, what and when?
>
> Well, there's code in SPLAT that I clearly wrote to do just this job (back
> in 2004), that is no longer working. The atools test above is the
> command-line version of what DIPSO uses to do a similar job, that clearly
> runs without an error, so I expect the same is true of the DIPSO code
> (looks like vintage 2003)
>
> I have a vague recollection of you saying something in this area had
> changed a good while back, so I'm working on the hypothesis that this code
> needed fixing anyway -- so don't worry since we seem to have a new test,
> which is working.
Funny thing is, the following still correctly reports an error:
PROGRAM SPECTEST
INCLUDE 'AST_PAR'
INTEGER STATUS
STATUS = 0
WRITE(*,*) AST_SPECFRAME( 'System=Wave,Unit=Hz', STATUS )
END
David
|