Re: Winding down patches...

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

Ethan Merritt wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 June 2007 10:35, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> 
>>This problem is the result of a bit of sloppiness in programming and trying to 
>>accomplish the whole tic layout in a simple hunk of code when it can't be done. 
>>  Basically, the fact is we *know* the beginning and end of the ranges as 
>>entered.  Why toss that information away by doing x_tic = x_min + x_delta + 
>>x_delta + x_delta + ...?
> 
> 
> Because it is bad to have vanishingly small changes in the specified range
> cause large changes in the plot layout?

Is the argument that a range [0:1.99805] should result in a plot having the same 
appearance as with range [0:2] (which they currently aren't)?  I.e., we're off 
by 0.0019500 for a range of 1.99805, or 0.0975 percent so no big difference? 
Hans-Bernhard suggested not doing such a thing.  The fix would be to simply not 
draw the tic and verticle dotted line outside the border for range [0:1.99805]. 
  That would still look like the [0:2] case.

Dan