[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: scientific numbers +ciftbx2.6.2

• Subject: Re: scientific numbers +ciftbx2.6.2
• From: "Herbert J. Bernstein" <yaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
• Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 13:01:18 GMT

Dear Doug,
  Thank you for the problem report.  I am able to reproduce the problem
and will track it down as quickly as possible.  I'll post a patch to
this list when I have it ready.
  Sorry about the problem.
  Regards,
    Herbert

=====================================================
****                BERNSTEIN + SONS
*   *       INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONSULTANTS
****     P.O. BOX 177, BELLPORT, NY 11713-0177
*   * ***
**** *            Herbert J. Bernstein
  *   ***     yaya@bernstein-plus-sons.com
 ***     *
  *   *** 1-631-286-1339    FAX: 1-631-286-1999
=====================================================

On Sat, 26 Jan 2002, Douglas du Boulay wrote:

> Hi,
> I was trying to read some numbers using numb_('',val,sig) in ciftbx-2.6.2 and
> struck a glitch with numbers in the format  0.319E+01
> Namely numb_() returns false.
> Replacing the value with  3.19 all works fine.
>
> Quoting from section 1.2 page 2 of the Ciftbx primer plus
> "A number string may be an integer, decimal or scientific notation"
>
> I beleive numbers such as "0.127E-21" are in scientific notation, so I am
> wondering is this a CIF syntax issue, a ciftbx issue , or just
> misunderstanding on my part.
> Obviously I would prefer not to have to reformat these values if I
> can avoid it.
>
> thanks in advance for any guidance.
> Doug
>

Reply to: [list | sender only]

• Prev by Date: scientific numbers +ciftbx2.6.2
• Next by Date: Re: scientific numbers +ciftbx2.6.2
• Prev by thread: scientific numbers +ciftbx2.6.2
• Next by thread: Re: scientific numbers +ciftbx2.6.2
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread