Re: various observations (added to list)

[<br...@ph...>]

Daniel J Sebald wrote:

>> Second because I see no sane reason why, to achieve a per-dataset 
>> choice of sampling rate for *function* plots, we should be mucking 
>> around with *data* file handling like that.

> Good thing to consider, but the idea is to keep the two independent.  

So let's not make data file handling any stranger just to add a feature 
found missing in function plotting.

> The 1D/2D p.d.f. is the function plot, the random points to plot are a 
> "data file".  

Only because treating them as function wouldn't work in this particular 
case.

They're a data file only because plotting the parametric function 
(rand(), rand(), -0.2) doesn't give you the right number of samples in a 
combined plot with some other function.

The 'natural' way of doing this plot would be something like

set parametric
plot u,v,norm2d(u,v) filter contour(levels=5) with lines, \
      invnorm(rand(0)),invnorm(rand(0)),-0.2 isosamples 5000,1 w p

We're erecting quite a pile of kluges and tricks to emulate this 
non-existing command.