That sounds great to me.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Matthew Turk email@example.com wrote:
Okay -- hearing no other suggestions (which is cool, this isn't that widely used or known of an ugly spot!) here's my solution, which I think I'll implement ASAP (definitely before another tagged release).
- Remove all fields where vector_field = True
- Split vector fields into components with X, Y, Z suffices. For 3.0
these will follow the new naming convention and be _x, _y, _z, but for now they should stick to what we have already for L components.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Matthew Turk firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I got an email from someone identifying a problem in profiles. This person was dealing with vector fields, which were giving bad results. I wanted to open up discussion here, as I know Jeff and Sam and others have thought about this. I'll contribute some thoughts after giving the mic over to someone else.
In an ideal world, how should a vector field -- like angular momentum, in particular -- be presented and dealt with in yt?
yt-dev mailing list email@example.com http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org