Re: Gentlemen, start your engines...

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

On Sunday 01 October 2006 07:38 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> How about a simple statement in "new-features" about expanded key placement?
> 
> In new features, how about that "dot size and color" style?  That was after 4.1, wasn't it?
Already listed in NEWS
 * NEW plot style "with points" can read variable point size from input file
 * NEW 3D plots can read RGB color triples as part of input data

> The following demos are not in all.dem:  
> 
> * colorwheel.dem (doesn't seem to do anything)

called by rainbow.dem

> * utf8.dem
> * charset.dem

These are more debugging tools than demos per se.
They require that you set up a terminal/character set/encoding
environment before running.

> * finance.dem (pretty snazzy)

maybe

> * macros.dem (this one appears to fail)

Works here.
You may be confused by the message from the recursion test;
basically it tries to recurse until it hits a limit, which triggers
a message telling you how deep the recursion can go.

> * molecule.dem
> * mouselab_1.dem, mouselab_2.dem, mouselabels.dem, mousevariables.dem 
> (move to a subdirectory "mouse"?) 

What exactly would be the benefit?

> * starmap.dem

Called by datastrings.dem

> It would be nice to move demos that are interactive or aren't general 
> in nature to subdirectories and have all demos that are in the base 
> (/demo) as part of all.dem.

Why?  I think it is far more logical to have all the demos in one
place, so you don't have to go hunting around for them.

> User who go to demo now and run "all.dem" will think they've seen 
> all the demos and will not take to time to look at all the demos.
> But with subdirectories, s/he will notice "oh there are some mouse demos"

That's more of an argument for renaming "all.dem" to "check.dem"
than it is an argument for splitting up the demos into multiple directories.


-- 
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742