[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #53000] Variable editor: Value of '0' is not a

From: Dan Sebald
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #53000] Variable editor: Value of '0' is not aligned correctly
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 21:24:25 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:55.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/55.0

Follow-up Comment #10, bug #53000 (project octave):

I'm testing some recent mods to the variable editor autofit/optimal-width.  In

changeset:   24670:62a05d23cd00

I find that the autofit isn't the way I'd prefer.  It seems to be
right-aligning within a 10-character width, which doesn't seem to achieve
optimal width for matrices that have short numbers like zeros() or eye(), that
is "0" or "1".

Try the following:

clear all
y = eye(5);
openvar y;

At this point I see in the V.E. the cell contents are left aligned.  Now,
select one of the cells and change a value from, say, "0" to "123".  All of
the numbers in the table will suddenly become right aligned.

Furthermore, decimal points don't align, enter 1.23 in one cell and 12.3 in a
cell below that one.  (It's OK to not have alignment, but if there is any,
decimal point would be my preference.)

[From a different bug report]  Now, as to the autofit behavior, the one thing
we have right now is the double-click to autofit feature that Philip
mentioned. I use that, and the autofit doesn't seem quite right. As an
example, do

x = zeros(50);
openvar x;

There is a great deal of whitespace to the left of the zero when there could
be more columns autofit in the view. Also, if I shrink the width of column 1,
say, down to nearly nothing and double-click the line between column 1 and 2,
the autofit occurs and goes back to that large-pre-whitespace width. If I
expand the first column so there is a large amount of white space after the
zero and double-click the line the the column goes back to the original
autofit size. So it seems that there is more pre-whitespace than necessary or
some type of minimum limit on the column width. Is this happening because the
code attempts to align the numbers, i.e., its format is 10 character width
numbers so that is somehow the minimum allowable size?


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]