[gmx-users] making maxwarn a hidden option

[Justin A. Lemkul]

ms wrote:
> On 29/12/10 21:57, chris.neale at utoronto.ca wrote:
>> That sounds reasonable. I don't like hidden options except for when they
>> are associated with manuscripts that have not yet been published.
> 
> As a "young" Gromacs user and an "old" free software user and developer, 
> I wholeheartedly disagree with hiding or making -maxwarn more difficult 
> -or whatever other option, FWIW. It would really annoy me, frankly. If 
> there is something I truly dislike, it is software (and developers) that 
> behave like nannies to their users.
> 
> If an option is available, it should be fully documented like everything 
> else. There is nothing more infuriating than discovering that you could 
> have done something you wanted to do, if only it was documented. Now, I 
> reckon that warnings should be verbose and that it should be explained 
> in detail what each warning means, but it's up to the user to decide 
> what to do.
> 
> In short: If you respect your users, you don't treat them like children 
> you hide the candies from.
> 
> Sorry for the rant and happy new year :)
> 

It seems that my little comment has generated quite the controversy :)

I think the root problem boils down to a lack of documentation of this feature. 
  For most routine use, -maxwarn should not be used, similar to -missing with 
pdb2gmx.  It is your last safeguard when fatal errors occur, but if it is 
implied that using it is somehow routine or convenient, then we begin to 
undermine the use of all those informative notes and warnings that grompp prints.

Looking through the grompp help description, there is no mention of this 
feature, and the one-line description is somewhat vague.  Perhaps the best 
solution is simply to add some documentation, in addition to the wiki entry I 
created.

The description of this flag is currently "Number of allowed warnings during 
input processing."  Perhaps it should say something like "Number of allowed 
warnings during input processing. Not for normal use and may generate unstable 
systems."  I would also think that a description should be added to the grompp 
-h text, like:

"The -maxwarn option can be used to override warnings printed by grompp that 
otherwise halt output.  In some cases, warnings are harmless, but usually are 
not.  The user is advised to carefully interpret the output messages before 
attempting to bypass them with this option."

If that sounds agreeable, I'll put in an enhancement request.

-Justin

-- 
========================================

Justin A. Lemkul
Ph.D. Candidate
ICTAS Doctoral Scholar
MILES-IGERT Trainee
Department of Biochemistry
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
http://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin

========================================