Re: Patches item #1729825 ready to go.

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

Ethan Merritt wrote:
> On Monday 04 June 2007 14:54, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> 
>>Let me toss this idea to Petr... What would you think of instead of removing 
>>items from the stack, say the user types
>>
>>foo = 35
>>plot x*foo
>>foo = 25
>>plot x*foo
>>history
>>foo = 20
>>plot x*foo
>>history
>>
>>and the result of the final history might be
>>
>>  1 foo = 35
>>  2 plot x*foo
>>  3 foo = 25
>>  6 foo = 20
>>  8 history
>>
>>For a more condensed appearance?
> 
> 
> I don't like it at all.
> 
> If I want the history, then I want it to show all the
> commands I issued, in the order they were issued.  The condensed
> form you show above would not let me determine from the history
> command what was the value of 'foo' when I made the most recent
> plot.  It's one thing to remove a series of "replot; replot; replot..."
> commands, since nothing changes between them.  But your example
> is hiding important changes.

Well, it could be programmed that way [but what user keeps typing replot; replot 
without making any changes in between? :-)].  The "do not put redundant commands 
in the history stack" as gnuplot currently behaves has the same problem you're 
pointing out.

Dan