> Why are we setting nscm=9999999 instead of 0?
For historical reasons probably: this was/is in line #874 in mdread.f
(IMHO it would be cleaner to set it to nstlim+1; or, even better,
set it to 0 and modify the rest of the code to handle nscm=0 properly
[should be very simple; I did not try to do that -- wanted to fix it
quickly because we lost like ~2 weeks of simulations because of this
bug]).
Have a great day,
Volodymyr
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Wed Jul 08 2009 - 18:08:11 PDT
