RE: Problem in running 12.2.4 example for optical photons

From: Francesco Cerutti <>
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 08:32:06 +0200

> Finally, everyone should consider that any new material not intended to
> overwrite anyone of the famous 25, does not need at all an explicit index by
> the user: the code will prolong itself the sequence, quite more safely.

Even better indeed! Also in case you re-define one of the 25 (keeping the
same name), still you do not need to specify the respective index: the
code will take the right one (20 for ARGON, which of course is then in
contradiction with the "18.0"s appearing elsewhere in the original example
originating this post)

Received on Wed Jul 13 2011 - 20:19:37 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jul 13 2011 - 20:19:37 CEST