eric, debug your applets using
set loglevel 5
and check the Java console. You will see a record of all moveto commands
and exactly what applets are talking and receiving. You should use the
most recent Jmol version, because I just updated that to work properly.
Still, it could be that I missed something, and with more than two
applets there is some interference. If only one is the driver be sure to
use:
sync . ON; sync > SLAVE
from the applet you want to be the driver.
Sending moveto commands. Hmm, that should work OK. Nothing special there.
Eric Martz wrote:
>Dear Bob,
>
>My main use for sync is to keep 2-4 molecules, in separate Jmols,
>aligned when one is rotated or zoomed with the mouse. I want any
>moused Jmol to send, so I command one Jmol "sync * on".
>
>In developing/debugging my Jmol Tutorial-Authoring Template (JTAT)'s
>support for 2-4 Jmols, I am running into erratic behavior when sync
>is on, and I then send a script to all Jmols. Moveto commands are
>particularly problematic, as you can imagine -- I think that during
>the execution of a jmolScript("...", "all"), the Jmol is sending
>moveto's to other Jmol's -- but concurrently, all are sending since
>all received the same jmolScript().
>
>If there is no simple existing solution to this problem, I would like
>to suggest a new setting, if feasible, such as
>
>set syncNoScripts
>or (meaning the same)
>set syncMouseOnly
>
>When on, this would disable sync sending during script execution (as
>distinct from moused movements), and automatically restore it at
>script termination. It would also make Jmol's sync more like Chime's
>synch (which has proven extremely satisfactory).
>
>
>
I've now isolated all the mouse actions, so that would in fact be very
easy. You mean only sync the mouse actions. Easy enough.
But try that debugging and maybe send me the log so I can see who was
talking to whom.
Bob
>I have considered trying to turn sync off myself at the beginning of
>a script, and then turn it on at the end. The main problem I envision
>is the asynchrony of the Jmols. If one finishes early, and I then try
>to restore sync-ing with "sync * on", the others may not yet have finished.
>
>Here is another idea. I could rework my code to send "sync . on" to
>each Jmol, rather than "sync * on" to one of them. Then I could "sync
>. off" at the beginning of a script, and "sync . on" at the end.
>
>As you can see, the Chime-type of synch function would greatly
>simplify the code I need in my tutorials. (Chime never synch'd
>commands sent via the script mechanism, only mouse movements). What
>do you think about a "syncMouseOnly" option for Jmol?
>
>-Eric
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>SF.Net email is sponsored by:
>Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
>It's the best place to buy or sell services
>for just about anything Open Source.
>http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
>_______________________________________________
>Jmol-users mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
>
>
--
Robert M. Hanson
Professor of Chemistry
St. Olaf College
Northfield, MN
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr
If nature does not answer first what we want,
it is better to take what answer we get.
-- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
Jmol-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jmol-users
