On 06/10/2010 10:05 AM, Angel Herráez wrote:
> Rolf, can you illustrate your comment? I have just run a simple test
> and I don't see the difference
>
> A model with 7 atoms :
> print {*}.atomindex.all.length // gives 7
> print {*}.atomindex.all.size // gives 7
> print {*}.atomindexl.max // gives 7
>
> after delete atomno=3 :
> print {*}.atomindex.all.length // gives 6
> print {*}.atomindex.all.size // gives 6
> print {*}.atomindex.max // gives 6
>
> and after delete atomno=7 :
> print {*}.atomindex.all.length // gives 5
> print {*}.atomindex.all.size // gives 5
> print {*}.atomindex.max // gives 5
>
>
Sorry, but I just remembered that Otis had a problem with using
".length" in the Jmol-user thread "Help with Jmol Math" on Feb 19 2010
and using ".max" instead solved the problem.
But there only "{*}.length" was used and not "{*}.atomindex.all.length"
or "{*}.atomindex.all.size".
Nevertheless I don't get the same numbers using Jmol 11.8.8 after loding
PDB entry 1DEH (although not affected by a deletion):
select all // gives 6098
print {*}.atomindex.all.length // gives 6098
print {*}.atomindex.all.size // gives 6098
print {*}.atomindex.max // gives 6097
Maybe the first atom index was changed from "0" to "1" so that in the
current developing versions the result is the same for all three commands.
But won't this change break all state files written before the change
because they are based on the atomIndex?
Regards,
Rolf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the
lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
_______________________________________________
Jmol-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
