Re: [h5md-user] Case of 1D systems

[Pierre de Buyl]

Hi Felix,

One of the reasons I am asking this is that in my current  
implementation, the H5MD routines automatically take into account the  
kind and shape of the data that is sent to them.
What happens is that it ends up being easier to work without the last  
dimension, then. I need to add it "by hand" for now.

If the same situation happens in other implementations, it becomes  
easier to drop the last dimension, else not.
As for the analysis, I usually do it in Python where it would quite  
easy to handle the flexibility.

Regards,

Pierre

Le 16 août 11 à 03:15, Felix Höfling a écrit :

> Hi Pierre,
>
> I would avoid special handling of limiting cases as much as  
> possible. It appears to introduce more headache in the end as one  
> needs special routines on both sites: when writing the file and  
> when analysing the results. One important aspect of the H5MD format  
> is the possibility of sharing analysis tools. I would prefer a tool  
> that can handle generic dimensions (and which does so in a generic  
> way). Of course, in a specialised tool the additional index appears  
> weird, for the benefit of the generic tool, however, I would like  
> to keep it.
>
> Best regards,
> Felix
>
>
> Am 15.08.2011, 21:46 Uhr, schrieb Pierre de Buyl  
> <address@hidden>:
>
> > In 1D systems, some parts of the specification may need modification.
> > For instance, requiring a [variable][N][D] shape when D=1 is absurd.
> >
> > Should we allow to throw away the last index for 1D systems ?
> > This is already the case for the species trajectory, which does  
> > not possess dimensions anyway.
> >
> > Pierre