<div dir="ltr">Glad that your first issue was solved and sorry about not getting back to your question from the user list. Actually for particular feature requests the help list I think would be the best. also you can try emailing the developers list at <a href="mailto:developers@...2...">developers@...2...</a>. <div><br></div><div>There is currently a long list of tasks from major bug fixes, to major revisions and including feature requests which can be viewed at <a href="http://trac.sasview.org">trac.sasview.org</a> under tickets. A direct link to one common way to look at those would be <a href="http://trac.sasview.org/report/3">http://trac.sasview.org/report/3</a></div><div><br></div><div>Please feel free to suggest things that you think would be the highest impact for your work</div><div><br></div><div>Regarding "soft constraints" could you elaborate what you mean? Currently fairly complex equality constraints are supported though there are questions about how well those work when polydispersity is used. Inequality constraints are not supported though there is interest in seeing that. Doing inequality constraints correctly is much harder which is the current bottleneck.</div><div><br></div><div>CHeers</div><div><br></div><div>Paul</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Marcelo Ceolin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mrceolin@...6..." target="_blank">mrceolin@...6...</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Dear Paul.<div dir="auto">Thank you very much for your care and answer.</div><div dir="auto">It is true the difference between 4.x and 3.x about the default fitting status of the parameters. In fact it is clear from the tutorial, that only ready to fit parameters can be constrained.</div><div dir="auto">For me is enough...I should only pay more attention !!!!.</div><div dir="auto">I also sent to the user forum a comment/question about the way to suggest the developers the incorporation of other features to the program.</div><div dir="auto">In fact, the point is the possibility to introduce soft boundaries and soft constrains for the parameters and more complex constrains and relationships between them.</div><div dir="auto">If you think there is a possibility to discuss the point, I will be glad to give more details.</div><div dir="auto">Thank you in advance.</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div dir="auto">Marcelo</div></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">El 2 sept. 2017 1:53 PM, "Paul Butler" <<a href="mailto:butlerpd@...4..." target="_blank">butlerpd@...4...</a>> escribió:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi Marcelo,<div><br></div><div>Sorry for the delayed response and thank you for your feedback. Addressing your two issues</div><div><br></div><div>1) After investigating this is not so much a bug it turns out as failure to make usage clear so thank you for bringing to our attention. Basically the drop-down will only show parameters of the model that were selected to fit (i.e. checked in the appropriate fitting panel). I have tested 4.1.2 on windows 10 and it does seem to work properly. However the default when loading a model is for all parameters to be unchecked so unless you deliberately check at least one parameter (in model 1 in your case) you will see nothing in the drop-down (of M1 in your case). If you go back and check at least one parameter for fitting (probably FitPage 1 in your case?) you should then see that parameter in the dropdown.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm thinking a statement in the fit constraints section indicating this to be the case would be appropriate?</div><div><br></div><div>2) This is a "known behavior" that some (many?) of us had forgotten so thank you for reminding us. I will make sure it is made a high priority ticket. However, this is only true for the LM optimizer. if you chose any of the other four optimizers for the fitting, those limits should be respected. Please let us know if that is not the case.</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks again for the feedback and hope this helps a little</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div><br></div><div>Paul</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Marcelo Ceolin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mrceolin@...6..." target="_blank">mrceolin@...6...</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Dear Developers of SASVIEW<div><br></div><div>I would like to report two bugs I found using the WINDOWS 4.1.2 release of SASVIEW</div><div>1) during the setup of SIMULTANEOUS fit and after selecting files to be fitted and activated the ADD CONSTRINS mode, there is no PARAMETER to select in the pull-down menu right from the parameter (please, find attached a screen capture)</div><div><br></div><div><img src="cid:ii_15e3965c667a188b" alt="Imágenes integradas 1" width="454" height="255"></div><div><br></div><div>2) during a normal SINGLE FILE fit using the GUINIER POROD model (I guess it has nothing to do with the model), the fiting procedure do not take care of the limits imposed to the parameters.</div><div><br></div><div>Thank you very much for your support.</div><div><br></div><div>Sincerely yours.</div><div><br></div><div>MARCELO CEOLIN<br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_1975066420155628915m_-203763824929325885m_-6286876497803499045gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">******************************<wbr>******************************<wbr>***********<br>Prof. Dr. Marcelo Ceolin<br>Instituto de Investigaciones Fisicoquímicas Teóricas y Aplicadas<br>UNLP-CONICET<br>Diagonal 113 y 64<br>Casilla de Correo 16 (sucursal 4)<br>(B1906ZAA) La Plata<br>Argentina<br><br>Tel: <a href="tel:+54%20221%20425-7291" value="+542214257291" target="_blank">+54-221-4257291</a> or 4257430 (int:173 or 162)<br>Fax: <a href="tel:+54%20221%20425-4642" value="+542214254642" target="_blank">+54-221-4254642</a><br>e-mail: <a href="mailto:mceolin@...639..." target="_blank">mceolin@...639...</a> (wo<wbr>rk) or <a href="mailto:mrceolin@...6..." target="_blank">mrceolin@...6...</a> (private)<br>WEB: <a href="https://softmatter.quimica.unlp.edu.ar/?page_id=5823" target="_blank">softmatter.quimica.unlp.edu.ar</a><wbr> (main) <span style="font-size:12.8px">or </span><a href="http://www.inifta.unlp.edu.ar/quimica_de_la_materia_blanda" style="font-size:12.8px" target="_blank">www.inifta.unlp.edu<wbr>.ar</a></div><div dir="ltr">ORCID ID: <a href="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2385-7803" target="_blank">ORCID ID 0000-0002-2385-7803</a> <br>Google Scholar: <a href="https://scholar.google.com.ar/citations?user=7LTN_j4AAAAJ&hl=es" target="_blank">Google Scholar</a></div><div dir="ltr">******************************<wbr>******************************<wbr>***********<br><br><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>
<br>------------------------------<wbr>------------------------------<wbr>------------------<br>
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most<br>
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! <a href="http://sdm.link/slashdot" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://sdm.link/slashdot</a><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Sasview-help mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Sasview-help@lists.sourceforge.net" target="_blank">Sasview-help@...643...<wbr>.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sasview-help" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/<wbr>lists/listinfo/sasview-help</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>