From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2005-01-19 03:28:35
|
Ethan Merritt wrote: >On Tuesday 18 January 2005 11:09 am, Harald Harders wrote: > > >>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ethan Merritt wrote: >> >> >> >>>I see no difference in the output before applying your patch >>>and after applying your patch. What, exactly, is the change >>>supposed to be? >>> >>> >>The difference only appears in the 3d plots (both with and without >>multiplot). All arrows and labels that start outside the boundaries >>0 <= screen coordinate <= 1 are missing. Since the screen may be larger >>using 'set size 1.4,1.4', for example, this is not okay for x>1 and y>1. >> >> > >You have a different understanding of "screen" than I do. >"set size" does not change the screen. > >The documentation says: > `screen` specifies the screen area (the entire area---not just > the portion selected by `set size`), with 0,0 at bottom left > and 1,1 at top right > >In other words, if it is outside the area >[0 < screen x < 1][ 0 < screen y < 1] >it should never be visible. > > That is my understanding. The plot examples that Harald I took as illustrative plots. I mean, I wouldn't expect gnuplot to output something where the screen occupies less than (or greater than) the plotted portion. For PostScript there is the issue of being able to view outside the bounding box and such. But that is unique to the terminal and outside viewer. >And yes, it is true that labels whose origin is outside the >visible area will not be drawn. That is intentional. > >So I think the only case being mis-handled by the current code >is if an arrow starts from off-screen in one direction, crosses >part of the screen, and terminates at another off-screen location. > >Is that the case you are concerned about? > > I'd say this is worth the fix. It's easy to compute where lines intersect borders and such if need be... well, a bit tedious but straightforward. >Here's a radically different proposal: > >The command "set size x, y" should be limited to values >of x and y between 0 and 1. It basically doesn't make sense >to set a size that is bigger than your screen. I know some >people will dislike this because they have existing scripts >that sort of work, but I think it is a case of relying on >behavior that is undocumented and not guaranteed. > > How does the zooming on interactive mouse splot work? (I.e., the middle button of the mouse, moving left and right. That doesn't require scaling greater than one, does it? I notice that when the zooming in that fashion, any labels seem to appear all of a sudden as though they are following the "off screen, do not plot whole string" rule. Aren't there some who will want to use this size greater than one to get a larger splot anyway? Because of splot's larger margins? I wouldn't totally rule out some legitimate use for a larger than 1.0 size. Not immediately anyway. Dan |