"Missing critical ForceField parameters!" ... but which ones?

[Axel]

hi guillaume!

On Dec 3, 5:22 pm, Guillaume <glam... at alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
> It works.  Thanks!
>
> (I believe I had this line commented out to make it work with a
> previous version of CP2K...)

nope, this is probably inherited from some hacking
waaaaay back in the CMM to make this parameter file
compatible with NAMD or whatever else.

teo and i have been through this already a while ago. :-(

>
> I realize that syntax errors are not caught when the input files are
> read, but only once all the information is loaded into memory, but it
> would still be very useful to have CP2K printing the lines of the
> input files that are responsible for the error.

the problem is that CP2K in some respect did the right thing.
this all comes down to semantics. in principle a continuation
marker can be interpreted as "the next line is part of this line"
or "continue reading with the next valid line". which one is correct?

cheers,
    axel.