RE: [ccp4bb]: pksearch

["Bernhard Rupp" <br@llnl.gov>]

***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***

> aaah, i smell flame-bait !

Seemed to have worked !

> in the pathetic case that the entire map is zero etc...

Well taken. Such was expected to be covered in the 'whatever' clause in
the comment. Very useful construct.

> ..... but does require separate code (different nr of indices in array and
> different nr of nested loops)

Sure. But if I can improve my garde to A, I'll give it a hack (think
recursion)

> why ? all this does is force individual peaks to have a certain minimum
> separation > 1 grid point. in coarse, low-resolution maps

I wasn't necessarily thinking Patterson. In oversampled noisy arrays
it should be useful. You can make in fact many things like running
average boxes etc out of a similar loop core.

> but the explicit case requires only [(2m+1)**n]-1 IF statements

I thought big and spoke asymptotically ;-)

> ..... "to every complex problem, there is fast, easy-to-comprehend, wrong
> solution" :-)

I'll http that to the guys waiting for the server to return
the slow, difficult to understand, but otherwise equivalent answer ;-)

> all in all: a B for effort

Am I glad you don't know how I coded that Patterson function.... ;-)

Cheers, BR