From: Rafael L. <rla...@us...> - 2004-09-02 18:28:08
|
* Alan W. Irwin <ir...@be...> [2004-09-02 11:04]: > Because the C examples test show no severe memory management problems, I > think there can only be two explanations of the problems encountered for > gif and the high-level octave interface where extensive testing shows no > gif problems for any other interface (including the low-level octave > interface). > > 1. The high-level octave interface is not initializing the gif device > correctly. > > 2. The high-level octave interface is initializing and using the gif device > correctly, but it is doing it in a different way or different order than the > C interface (or any other interface including the low-level octave > interface), and this different way exercises a bug in the gif device driver. > > To test both hypotheses, it would be interesting for Rafael to try > essentially the same thing as the above high-level cookbook but using just > the low-level octave interface to mimic exactly what the high-level > interface does in the same order to initialize the device. If the low-level > interface always works regardless of any way you tweak it (and associated > valgrind runs show no extra memory management problems), then probably > hypothesis 1 is the explanation of the problem. > > Good luck, Andrew and Rafael in sorting out the cause of this problem. Thanks for the extensive tests and the hypotheses formulation. I will have a hectic month before me and my involvement with PLplot will have to be reduced to the essential minimum during this period (for instance, the official 5.3.1 announcement, if I can get to that). Fixing the crazy interaction bug between Octave and GD is far beyond what I can afford in my current time budget. Joao would be the appropriate person for doing that, but he may be busy as well. I am sorry. -- Rafael |