Search found 6 matches
- Wed Jul 13, 2011 5:21 am
- Forum: Installation
- Topic: Any guidance on when we will see 3.0?
- Replies: 13
- Views: 7456
Re: Any guidance on when we will see 3.0?
My Internet connection is slow, so each file takes roughly 2.5 hours to download. Plus, I can't connect via the internet from the machines I actually do my work on, which means I then have to transfer the downloaded files to the actual machine I work on -- so double the transfer time. If I could ret...
- Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:14 pm
- Forum: Installation
- Topic: Any guidance on when we will see 3.0?
- Replies: 13
- Views: 7456
Re: Any guidance on when we will see 3.0?
How about a means of obtaining ADL 3.0 via ftp? That would be helpful.
- Fri Apr 01, 2011 9:40 am
- Forum: Installation
- Topic: Mx4 and ADL 2.0?
- Replies: 0
- Views: 1844
Mx4 and ADL 2.0?
Is the ADL package that was included with the MX4 code (IDPS v1.5.04.00) supposed to be ADL 2.0? The ADL files under Mx4 show ADL 1.1, is that what I should have expected?
- Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:56 am
- Forum: VIIRS SDR
- Topic: bitfields concern
- Replies: 3
- Views: 22517
Re: bitfields concern
Perhaps a regular DR should be written against the IDPS code on this? I've emailed Neal Baker to get feedback since he's managing a lot of the DRs.
- Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:03 am
- Forum: VIIRS SDR
- Topic: bitfields concern
- Replies: 3
- Views: 22517
bitfields concern
It seems that we should move away from using bitfields if we are trying to have the code be platform independent. We (Land PEATE) found some arguments to support this when researching bitfield usage online: "In general you should avoid bitfields and instead use explicit bit masking and shifting...
- Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:35 am
- Forum: Installation
- Topic: What will ADL 3.0 have?
- Replies: 1
- Views: 1920
What will ADL 3.0 have?
Does anyone know if ADL 3.0 that will accompany v1.5.5 of the IDPS code will have all of the algorithms integrated to work with it instead of just a subset?