Re: Patches item #1729825 ready to go.

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

Ethan Merritt wrote:
> On Monday 04 June 2007 15:14, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> 
>>>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? :-)].
> 
> 
> Anyone who closes the plot window to do something else for a while?
> To get it back again, he types "replot".  I do this all the time.

True.


>>The "do not put redundant commands  
>>in the history stack" as 
> 
> 
> But your example has no redundant commands!  You are erasing
> commands that had a real effect on the contents of my screen.

Just going with current behavior (and as I pointed out, it made a tough time of 
keeping track of what was tossed out).


>>gnuplot currently behaves has the same problem you're  
>>pointing out.
> 
> 
> Ah, so maybe that's the reason I always found history to be
> unreliable.  I thought it was just an annoying bug that some of my
> commands seemed to disappear. I never figured out any rhyme or
> reason to it.

Yes, that's it.


> I strongly request that the default history behaviour is to leave
> all my commands in place.  I would consider this a bug-fix.

I'll put a patch together this evening with options (default numbered and 
non-condensed).  Simple changes.

So, would you also want that if the current command is exactly the same as the 
previous (and just the previous, no later) *then* it is not put in the history 
stack?

Dan