Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-15 Thread Pedro Lacerda
Hi, Thank you for your effort. This would be the very best option? Thinking the use case that users need all the states would be a lot harder. I would rather let state 0 refer to all the states like now, but upper nonexistent states give an error. This would remove some errors by 1, and would wo

Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-15 Thread Thomas Holder
> On Aug 12, 2019, at 2:56 PM, Christian Cole French > wrote: > > Maybe the nonexistent state warning is something that should be implemented > elsewhere as well. Selecting state 0 is now an error: https://github.com/schrodinger/pymol-open-source/commit/c09ce287d447e6c703e57d31ae3e5d53f8359e

Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-12 Thread Christian "Cole" French
Thanks for the info. I also didn't realize that states started at 1. Maybe the nonexistent state warning is something that should be implemented elsewhere as well. As for the implicit *or*, you can find it in https://pymolwiki.org/index.php/Selection_Algebra#Selection_Operator/Modifier_Table under

Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-09 Thread Pedro Lacerda
So missing boolean operators are filled with OR, for me this is should be a big and loud WARNING. I almost messed everything up because it almost passed in my tests. Also I mistake states a couple of days on multi-model files because I was counting from ZERO but states starts on ONE. That was unti

Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-09 Thread Christian "Cole" French
Hi Pedro, *count_states* is correct here; there's only 1 state, which is state 1. The reason for the observed *count_atoms* behavior is that "polymer" and "state" are different operators in the selection algebra, so putting them together without a logical operator such as "and" or "or" between the

Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-09 Thread Pedro Lacerda
Question answered. Best regards! Em sex, 9 de ago de 2019 às 12:33, Christian "Cole" French < christian.fre...@schrodinger.com> escreveu: > Hi Pedro, > > *count_states* is correct here; there's only 1 state, which is state 1. > The reason for the observed *count_atoms* behavior is that "polymer"

Re: [PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-09 Thread Pedro Lacerda
I'm also puzzled by the scope of state: *PyMOL>count_atoms polymer state 1 within 5 of resn NAP* > count_atoms: 8205 atoms > > *PyMOL>count_atoms polymer state 1 within 0 of resn NAP* > count_atoms: 8109 atoms > > *PyMOL>count_atoms polymer (state 1) within 0 of resn NAP* > count_atoms: 8109 at

[PyMOL] count_atoms and states

2019-08-09 Thread Pedro Lacerda
Hi, There is only one state but the atom counting changes between states 0, 1 and 2. What this means? *PyMOL>fetch 1e92* > > TITLE Pteridine reductase 1 from Leishmania major complexed with NADP+ > and dihydrobiopterin > ExecutiveLoad-Detail: Detected mmCIF > CmdLoad: loaded as "1e92". >