Opps, Should have spotted the noe_r1_table issue. I've shifted the new code as you suggest. The other change that somehow escaped my last commit is the deletion of the if condition in the function read_columnar_relax_data() at line 3221 in specific_fns/model_free.py The test for consistency that follows is then redundant. On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 04:39, Edward d'Auvergne wrote: > Oh, for readability it might be worth having an empty line before each > comment and subsequent block of code. It makes it easier to read and > understand the code. As for the mailing list, a 'reply to all' option > should CC the email to the relax-devel list as well as the person > you're responding to. > > > On 12/01/06, Edward d'Auvergne <edward.dauvergne@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Chris, > > > > Good idea to pop the empty data out after the fact. It's a nice and > > simple fix. There will, however, probably be a problem with the > > residue specific data structure 'noe_r1_table[]'. As the pop commands > > are run, the indexes in 'noe_r1_table' will need to be changed to a > > different integer or to None. This structure is essential for > > minimisation. > > > > It may be easier to shift your code into the file > > 'specific_fns/relax_data.py' and into the bizarrely named function > > 'add_residue()', probably around line 90 but before the 'num_ri' and > > 'num_frq' assignment. The the 'noe_r1_table' structure will then be > > correctly constructed and you won't need an algorithm to fix the > > structure post construction. What do you think? > > > > _______________________________________________ > Relax-devel mailing list > Relax-devel@xxxxxxx > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/relax-devel >