On Friday 06 October 2006 21:50, Eric Martz wrote: > Personally, I think that adding energy minimization to Jmol is going too > far.
That's what I would say at this moment too. Maybe when we all have ADSL2 or even VDSL things become differently... > I fear it would greatly increase the bulk and cumbersomeness of the > Jmol applet -- unless it can be somehow a separate module that is not > downloaded or interpreted by the client unless explicitly needed. In any > case, if people wish to integrate an optional energy minimization module, I > agree that it would have to start from an open-source base. Not knowing > anything about open-source energy-minimization software, I'll defer to > others. There are a number of open source force field programs around (GROMACS, MOPAC7.1?/2, CDK has a basic FF too)... And with Bioclipse [1] we had a summer student work on integration of an earlier MOPAC version into Bioclipse, via Ghemical. A sculpt feature would fit in very nicely here. Can anyone tell me wether or not the Sculpt concept is patented? Egon 1.http://www.bioclipse.net/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cologne University Bioinformatics Center (CUBIC) Blog: http://chem-bla-ics.blogspot.com/ GPG: 1024D/D6336BA6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Jmol-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
