I am using the latest version, updated an hour ago. The code is: Particles r_particles; for(ParticlesList::iterator it1 = r.get_interacting_particles().begin(); it1 != r.get_interacting_particles().end(); it1++){ std::cout<<it1->size()<<std::endl; for(Particles::iterator it2 = it1->begin(); it2 != it1->end(); it2++) { r_particles.push_back(*it2); } }
The size I get from the first one is: 17507811567898 The restraint is of type connectivity restraint (active):
I solved it by using: Particles r_particles; ParticlesList pl; for(ParticlesList::iterator it1 = pl.begin(); it1 != pl.end(); it1++){ std::cout<<it1->size()<<std::endl; for(Particles::iterator it2 = it1->begin(); it2 != it1->end(); it2++) { r_particles.push_back(*it2); } }
but I think that the first version should work as well - no ??
On Aug 21, 2008, at 12:54 AM, Ben Webb wrote:
> Keren Lasker wrote: >> ok - so I am using the latest IMP version, which broke my c++ code as >> now I should use get_interacting_particles., which is fine. >> The problem is that it is not working for ConnectivityRestraint >> from c+ >> +. >> The first Particles I get in the ParticlesList is garbage. > > What sort of garbage? Invalid pointers, or something else? Can you > post > your code? > >> does it suppose to work on or at this point ? > > Sure, it's supposed to work - at least in the revision at > https://salilab.org/internal/imp/tests.html > since that's from the nightly build, and all the tests passed. There > are > unit tests for this method. What you should be getting for > ConnectivityRestraint is the default implementation from Restraint, > which is a 1-element ParticlesList containing a Particles vector with > all Particles in the restraint. > > Ben > -- > ben@salilab.org http://salilab.org/~ben/ > "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data." > - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle > _______________________________________________ > IMP-dev mailing list > IMP-dev@salilab.org > https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/imp-dev