iraf.net

>From schweizer@ociw.edu Mon Mar 8 15:56:57 2004
Sender: schweizer@ociw.edu
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 14:56:49 -0800
From: Francois Schweizer <schweizer@ociw.edu>
Organization: Carnegie Observatories
X-Accept-Language: en
To: Mike Fitzpatrick <fitz@noao.edu>
Subject: Re: `hedit' in simple script
References: <200403070505.i2755ZE08314@tucana.tuc.noao.edu>Hi Mike,Thank you so much for your explanation, which nearly completely answers my
question.What I didn't say in my previous message and what confused me is that the
slightly longer script:
# do_hedit_test.cl
imdelete test.fits
imcopy spn7w03.fits test.fits
hedit test VOBS "9999."when submitted via `cl < do_hedit_test.cl' and with `verify=yes' set in
the parameter sets of both `imdelete' and `hedit', does work for `imdelete'
but not for `hedit'!I now think that, with the help of your explanation, I may have figured out
the reason: Besides the `verify' parameter, `imdelete' also has a
`default_acti=yes' parameter, while `hedit' does not. Based on your
explanation, I am guessing that this is while during CL execution I am
given a chance to confirm the deletion, which then is carried out, but
I am not given a chance to confirm the header editing, which therefore
is not carried out.Is this right?Cheers,
Francois>From fitz Thu Mar 25 10:25:58 2004
To: schweizer@ociw.edu
Subject: Re: `hedit' in simple scriptHi Francois,
Sorry for the slow reply. I was out of town and then just came
across this in my backlog.> What I didn't say in my previous message and what confused me is that the
> slightly longer script:
> # do_hedit_test.cl
> imdelete test.fits
> imcopy spn7w03.fits test.fits
> hedit test VOBS "9999."
>
> when submitted via `cl < do_hedit_test.cl' and with `verify=yes' set in
> the parameter sets of both `imdelete' and `hedit', does work for `imdelete'
> but not for `hedit'!
>
> I now think that, with the help of your explanation, I may have figured out
> the reason: Besides the `verify' parameter, `imdelete' also has a
> `default_acti=yes' parameter, while `hedit' does not. Based on your
> explanation, I am guessing that this is while during CL execution I am
> given a chance to confirm the deletion, which then is carried out, but
> I am not given a chance to confirm the header editing, which therefore
> is not carried out. In this case I think the answer depends on whether the VOBS keyword
is already in the image, and whether you've set other HEDIT params such as
'add' or 'update'. If the keyword doesn't exist and you're using the default
HEDIT params, the task will appear to run but the image won't be updated
since the keyword isn't present. This is different that setting e.g. the
'verify' param but it not executing because of the redirection mentioned
before. Putting an 'add+' on the hedit line may be all you need to get it
to work.Cheers,
-Mike