# Suggestions for \`uq\_display\` and \`uq\_simple\_parser\`

**URL:** <https://uqworld.org/t/suggestions-for-uq-display-and-uq-simple-parser/867>\
**Category:** Feature Requests\
**Tags:** inversion\
**Created:** [October 1, 2020, 9:02am UTC](https://uqworld.org/t/suggestions-for-uq-display-and-uq-simple-parser/867 "2020-10-01T09:02:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![olaf.klein](https://uqworld.org/user_avatar/uqworld.org/olaf.klein/32/468_2.png) [@olaf.klein](https://uqworld.org/u/olaf.klein)\
**Post date:** [October 1, 2020, 9:02am UTC](https://uqworld.org/t/suggestions-for-uq-display-and-uq-simple-parser/867/1 "2020-10-01T09:02:39Z")

</div>

Hello,

I would like to suggest improvements for the functions `uq_display` and `uq_simple_parser`:

`uq_display`: To be able to autocratically save the generated plots or to adapt them individually, if would be helpful if the functions called by `uq_display` would return an array with the handles of the created functions which would then returned by `uq_display`.

`uq_simple_parser`: Being a master of typos, it may happen that in my code  
there is `uq_postProcessInversion(myBayesianAnalysis, 'burnin', 0.75);` or `uq_postProcessInversion(myBayesianAnalysis, 'burnln', 0.75);` instead of `uq_postProcessInversion(myBayesianAnalysis, 'burnIn', 0.75);`, but the two erroneous calls do not create any error and may stay therefore undetected in the code. This can create erroneous results that are difficult to explain. I only use here `uq_postProcessInversion` as example since I use this function quite often, and the burnln/burnIn similarity (which one is with `I`, which one with `l`?) is a good possibility to point out a problem but I think this is a problem for many UQLab functions.

I suggest that `uq_simple_parser(varargin, parse_keys, parse_types);` should create an error message or at least a warning, if in the given `varargin` list there is an option name not being listed in the `parse_keys` list.  
This could also help user of UQLab to realize that a UQLab-function call somewhere deep hidden in their code must be updated since in the new UQLab version the possible options have been changed. Of course, it is then somehow annoying for the users to have to change the code. But, I think that is it a larger problem, if the code seems to continue to run without problems, but may generate some unexpected/wrong results.

Greetings  
Olaf