7 Aug
2013
7 Aug
'13
7:38 p.m.
On 08/07/2013 03:27 PM, Kevin Jorissen wrote:
The needed improvements are exactly those changes made in later versions. That is why I am more drawn to a FEFF9L than to fitting some of the improvements into the old FEFF6L, but I will discuss it with the other developers.
My vast preference is to see Feff9L happen rather than to back port things to Feff6L. Can't imagine anyone would disagree with that. B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel@bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS --- Beamlines U7A, X24A, X23A2 Building 535A Upton NY, 11973 Homepage: http://xafs.org/BruceRavel Software: https://github.com/bruceravel