[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: moving toward a 3.0 release

From: Bill Denney
Subject: Re: moving toward a 3.0 release
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 07:21:11 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20060909)

Dmitri A. Sergatskov wrote:
On 9/27/06, Bill Denney <address@hidden> wrote:
One of the major difficulties I had is that I don't know gnuplot well,
and I therefore had difficulty trying to make gnuplot work with the
frontend.  Without a good backend, it's tough to test the frontend.  The
other problem is that with the speed of the interpreter, it takes ~30
second to create first figure.
Does it have to be a gnuplot? -- Do not get me wrong I do think that
gnuplot is a fine stand-alone program. But in a situation where we
want to emulate matlab behavior i may not be the best choice.
I believe even John once said that if he had to start all over
again he is not sure that his choice for a graphical end would
be gnuplot. Since this graphics handle thing is a new thing perhaps
we could think of a different backend?

It doesn't have to be gnuplot at all. I admit that I've not used the other options much (octplot and octaviz), and I was honestly hoping that someone would write the backend to go with me writing the front end. All that is really required is the ability to draw lines, arbitrary polygons, and write text (with arbitrary rotations). There are some other features that would be very nice, but that is all that is required of the backend.


reply via email to

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