> I've committed Volodymyr's patch to extra_pts.f to the amber11 tree
> (sorry--I
> deleted his original email.) Also rationalized allocations based on
> max11,
> max12 and max13 as well.
I haven't followed every message in this thread closely but did anyone
actually figure out where the value used in the allocation comes from? Is it
related to the number of extra points that one has on a residue? It would
probably make sense while people are in the code here to try and work out
exactly what size the array should be and why and then modify things to
allocate the arrays to be the exact size required rather than just some
'larger' size that seems to work.
If this was already addressed earlier then please disregard my comments.
Just my 3c.
All the best
Ross
/\
\/
|\oss Walker
| Assistant Research Professor |
| San Diego Supercomputer Center |
| Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- ross.rosswalker.co.uk |
|
http://www.rosswalker.co.uk | PGP Key available on request |
Note: Electronic Mail is not secure, has no guarantee of delivery, may not
be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues.
Received on Fri Dec 05 2008 - 14:33:50 PST
