|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard
Doug Tody a écrit :
I'll just second this. I have seen many cases where a FITS header gets multiple keyword instances after it has been modified by different programs. This is awful of course as the header is then ambiguous, but it happens. Software may or may not use the last instance as a runtime value; for example, if the software does a linear search through the header it is possible that it will take the first value encountered (for either reading or writing) as this is more efficient, and there are not supposed to be multiple keyword instances. Well, if the software does a linear search through the header, I think it already relinquished its right to invoke efficiency considerations :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Rob Seaman | FITS | 3 | August 21st 07 06:43 PM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Steve Allen | FITS | 0 | August 20th 07 04:47 AM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Doug Tody | FITS | 0 | August 20th 07 03:40 AM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Mark Calabretta | FITS | 0 | August 20th 07 03:17 AM |
[fitsbits] Proposed Changes to the FITS Standard | Mark Calabretta | FITS | 0 | August 1st 07 09:01 AM |