Okay, will turn it to 0.01*tol for now (instead of 1e-5), with clear documentation in Interpolant.h.  As for the python layer, we don't seem to have docstrings for the interpolants in python at all??  Perhaps I should stick some in pysrc/Interpolant.cpp for all of them, and add a note about this xvalue/kvalue thing in the docstrings for Lanczos?

On Apr 22, 2013, at 10:17 AM, Barnaby Rowe <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In src/Interpolant.cpp:
> 
> > @@ -140,6 +140,11 @@
> >      Lanczos::Lanczos(int n, bool fluxConserve, double tol) :  
> >          _n(n), _fluxConserve(fluxConserve), _tolerance(tol)
> >      {
> > +        // TODO: These can't be retrieved from any GSParams object.
> > +        //       Should they be tol?  0.01*tol?
> > +        const double xvalue_accuracy = 1.e-5;
> > +        const double kvalue_accuracy = 1.e-5;
> I think I agree with that, while it's not as complete as having a whole InterpParams class I think it is likely to be safe and is definitely less unwieldy. However, if we do use this kludge we ought to document it here, in Interpolant.h and at the Python layer too. Otherwise I'm not fundamentally objecting to the InterpParams class, I just think that it might be overkill now and so we should document a working solution and come back to this later if need be.
> 
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
> 


-------------------------------

Rachel Mandelbaum
rmandelb@andrew.cmu.edu
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/~rmandelb/