gnuplot-beta

[4.2-rc1] set term X

[Lutz M. <ma...@be...>]

Hello,

I just tried some of my gnuplot scripts with the 4.2-rc1 version. It turns out 
that a lot of them fail, since I frequently use 'set term X' as an 
abbreviation for 'set term X11'. This does not seem to work with the latest 
version, I get the error message 

  unknown or ambiguous terminal type; type just 'set terminal' for a list

"set terminal" lists x11 and xlib as terminal types starting with 'x'. Up to 
version 4.0 it seems like the terminal name was case sensitive, and 
"X11" (with the abbreviation "X") was explicitly listed to be equivalent to 
"x11".

Would it be possible to reintroduce "X" as a valid abbreviation of "x11", or 
was this decision made on purpose to clean up the code?

  Lutz

Re: [4.2-rc1] set term X

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

On Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Lutz Maibaum wrote:

> Would it be possible to reintroduce "X" as a valid abbreviation of
> "x11", or was this decision made on purpose to clean up the code?

See for yourself:

	grep -8 "2006-06-28" ChangeLog

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.

Re: [4.2-rc1] set term X

[Lutz M. <ma...@be...>]

On Thursday 05 October 2006 14:36, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Lutz Maibaum wrote:
> > Would it be possible to reintroduce "X" as a valid abbreviation of
> > "x11", or was this decision made on purpose to clean up the code?
>
> See for yourself:
>
> 	grep -8 "2006-06-28" ChangeLog

This seems to be the entry you're referring to:

2006-06-28  Ethan A Merritt  <merritt@u.washington.edu>

        * src/term.c (change_term) term/x11.trm: The x11 terminal driver has
        been carrying around two copies of TERM_TABLE, one named "x11" and
        the other named "X11". But the "X11" copy has suffered from bit rot.
        Delete this redundant copy, and instead replace "X11" with "x11"
        at the time the "set term" request is processed.

I am not sure how this relates to my problem. In version 4.0 there were three 
valid terminal names: "xlib", "x11", and "X11" (which according to "set 
terminal" was already the same as "x11"). "set term X" was a valid 
abbreviation for "set term X11".

In 4.2-rc1, these three terminal names are still valid, but "set term X" 
fails. Are abbreviations case sensitive? If they are, then "X" should be a 
valid abbreviation of "X11", and there wouldn't be any ambiguity. If they are 
not, then it surprises me why it worked in 4.0.

  Lutz

Re: [4.2-rc1] set term X

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Lutz Maibaum wrote:
> Up to 
> version 4.0 it seems like the terminal name was case sensitive, and 
> "X11" (with the abbreviation "X") was explicitly listed to be equivalent to 
> "x11".
> 
> Would it be possible to reintroduce "X" as a valid abbreviation of "x11", or 
> was this decision made on purpose to clean up the code?

Not sure if there should be an informal policy of precedence.

Is "xlib" important to you?  If not, you can build a version without xlib with the attached patch.  I guess that is a not too egregious way of accomplishing what you want.

Dan

Re: [4.2-rc1] set term X

[Ethan M. <merritt@u.washington.edu>]

On Wednesday 04 October 2006 11:49 pm, Lutz Maibaum wrote:
> I frequently use 'set term X' as an abbreviation for 'set term X11'. 
> This does not seem to work with the latest version
>
> Up to version 4.0 it seems like the terminal name was case
> sensitive, and "X11" (with the abbreviation "X") was explicitly
> listed to be equivalent to "x11".

No. Up until 4.1 there were actually two terminal driver tables,
one for x11 and one for "X11".  This was pointless, and in fact a
source of error.  You may not have noticed, but the "X11" one
had not been kept up to date with the x11 one.  Anyhow, we got
rid of the redundant table and added a check for "X11" as a
special case. If found, it is converted to "x11".

> Would it be possible to reintroduce "X" as a valid abbreviation of
> "x11", or was this decision made on purpose to clean up the code?

The code clean up was deliberate.  Causing the shorthand form "X"
to fail was unintentional.  It's fixable, at the cost of an extra
line or 2 of code.


-- 
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle WA

Re: [4.2-rc1] set term X

[Lutz M. <ma...@be...>]

On Thursday 05 October 2006 16:17, Ethan Merritt wrote:
> The code clean up was deliberate.  Causing the shorthand form "X"
> to fail was unintentional.  It's fixable, at the cost of an extra
> line or 2 of code.

I would appreciate such a fix very much. I use "set term X" all the time. In 
fact, until yesterday I wasn't even aware that this is not the full name of 
the terminal driver.

  Lutz

Re: [4.2-rc1] set term X

[Ethan M. <merritt@u.washington.edu>]

On Thursday 05 October 2006 04:31 pm, Lutz Maibaum wrote:
> On Thursday 05 October 2006 16:17, Ethan Merritt wrote:
> > The code clean up was deliberate.  Causing the shorthand form "X"
> > to fail was unintentional.  It's fixable, at the cost of an extra
> > line or 2 of code.
>
> I would appreciate such a fix very much. I use "set term X" all the
> time. In fact, until yesterday I wasn't even aware that this is not
> the full name of the terminal driver.

OK. Thanks for the bug report.

-- 
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle WA