Re: [AMBER-Developers] Experiences with sleap

From: Ross Walker <>
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 20:14:24 -0700

> However, your overall point I think is a good one. If the developer
> community at large does not find Cpptraj functionally better to some
> degree, or agree that further development of Cpptraj is useful, then
> in continuing I'd essentially be tilting at windmills. The general
> feedback I've received from people using Cpptraj so far has been
> positive, but it would certainly be good to get a general consensus,
> either at the developer's meeting or perhaps before.

Dan, the spirit of my comment was the reverse of this. That is given the
advantages of cpptraj we should consider having it replace ptraj and
deprecate ptraj to old code we consider not supported anymore. The key to
this being successful though is having the people involved (with the main
decision resting with Tom I guess) decide that this is what we want to do.
In which case, decision made, people can help contribute to cpptraj such
that we can expedite getting all of the functionality of ptraj (that we want
to keep) transferred across.

My point is that I think we need to make some clear decisions in situations
where we have a lot of duplication and decide which path we want to follow
moving forward. Where there are clear beneficial arguments, which I believe
there are with cpptraj, then that is perhaps the path we should take.

All the best

|\oss Walker

| Assistant Research Professor |
| San Diego Supercomputer Center |
| Adjunct Assistant Professor |
| Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry |
| University of California San Diego |
| NVIDIA Fellow |
| | |
| Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- |

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.

AMBER-Developers mailing list
Received on Thu Nov 03 2011 - 20:30:03 PDT
Custom Search