I agree that this information, specifically the current number of star
particles, should be easy to get at. Maybe the solution should be on the
enzo side instead of the yt side, as in maybe enzo should be carrying that
around as a variable that can easily be made an attribute to the pf or put
in the pf.parameters dict. I'm just wondering if that may just be easier.
Just a thought.
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Stephen Skory <stephenskory(a)yahoo.com>wrote:
after my conversation on -users with Matt, and the recent investigations of
inline yt, a thought occurs to me. The whole point of the conversation was
that I would like to do some inline analysis of a simulation with star(s).
As a zero-order test, the analysis shouldn't run if there are no stars, so I
wanted to find out how many stars there are. But as the conversation
revealed, it isn't simple/blindingly obvious to do that kind of calculation
in a way that works in serial, parallel, and inline, e.g. with derived
How do we feel about my writing a set of convenience functions that make
these simple calculations easy? This shouldn't be comprehensive, just things
that might come up often. Thoughts?
510.621.3687 (google voice)
Yt-dev mailing list