Garry R. Osgood writes: > Confining my attention to > iwarp_deform(), his changes seemed purely > administrative, appearing to achieve the same > computational aims in a smaller memory footprint > and with less processing. But iwarp behavior had > clearly changed. Thanks for taking the time to look into this. As you might guess, I was not completely sure that my change didn't change the working of IWarp, and my fears were justified... I'll back out the change. > It would likely be easier to reinstate the version > before 1.11. Yes, I'll do that. --tml, blushing
