As highlighted in a recent email by @cffischer, jj2lsj crashes on lists with both parities present, and does not print out any warnings ( I think?). Only @gaigalas knows how hard it would be to extend the routine, and how much time it would take. We all have many things to do.
I would consider this "enhancement" having relatively low priority, but should nevertheless be adressed at some point.
Maybe a quick solution would be to add a check in jj2lsj and stop with an informative warning text for such lists?
As highlighted in a recent email by @cffischer,
jj2lsjcrashes on lists with both parities present, and does not print out any warnings ( I think?). Only @gaigalas knows how hard it would be to extend the routine, and how much time it would take. We all have many things to do.I would consider this "enhancement" having relatively low priority, but should nevertheless be adressed at some point.
Maybe a quick solution would be to add a check in
jj2lsjand stop with an informative warning text for such lists?