Re: [patch #4130] Extended system test for providing list of spectra ID for NMRPipe seriesTab -- September 02, 2013 - 15:32

Ok, then we can ignore it.  That ability can be added in the future if
someone asks.

Regards,

Edward



On 2 September 2013 15:25, Troels Emtekær Linnet <tlinnet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> No, not yet. :-)
>
> I would instead have several NMRPipe seriestab files.
> Or chose to delete the spectrum after loadning.
>
>
> Troels Emtekær Linnet
>
>
> 2013/9/2 Edward d'Auvergne <edward@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Hi,
> >
> > For the spectrum.read_intensities user function, the int_col is
> > currently ignored for the NMRPipe seriesTab format.  But maybe it
> > could be used.  For example if the user would like to only extract the
> > data from one column.  So if you set int_col to 10, then data from the
> > 2th data column would be extracted.  And if spectrum_id is set to
> > 'auto', the 'Z_A1' can be used.  Do you see any value in having this
> > ability?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Edward
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2 September 2013 15:12, Troels Emtekær Linnet <tlinnet@xxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Edward.
> > >
> > > So the question if, if it neccessary for the user to supply a 'int_col'
> > > list, when loading
> > > a NMRPipe SeriesTab file.
> > >
> > > There is a check, which is made for the generic format list, where
> > > 'int_col'
> > > has been designed.
> > > But it should not apply for NMRPipe SeriesTab. ?
> > >
> > > The easiest fix for the user, is just to supply the list.
> > > But the list is not used for anything yet, and could just create
> > > confusion.
> > >
> > > Best
> > > Troels
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Troels Emtekær Linnet
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/9/2 Edward d Auvergne <NO-REPLY.INVALID-ADDRESS@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4130 (project relax):
> > > >
> > > > This patch does not change the test.  It passes before and after
> > > > applying
> > > > the
> > > > patch.  What is the purpose of this addition?  Why is it part of an
> > > > existing
> > > > test and not a new test?  Are you trying to replicate bug #21076
> > > > (http://gna.org/bugs/?21076)?
> > > >
> > > > Note that the patch is missing a newline at the end - there should be 2
> > > > empty
> > > > lines between functions/methods.
> > > >
> > > >     _______________________________________________________
> > > >
> > > > Reply to this item at:
> > > >
> > > >   <http://gna.org/patch/?4130>
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > >   Message sent via/by Gna!
> > > >   http://gna.org/