Re: Axis rescaling: [was: Re: Quick refresh [was: q for quit in plot windows]]

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

Ethan Merritt wrote:
> On Thursday 28 June 2007 12:56, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> 
>>>Dan: <<I think it doesn't get us in the direction we want to go, which is
>>>to eventually store the data, all of it, and then just reuse it in whatever
>>>way we see fit.>>
>>>
>>>Please give a concise example of what you mean.  How would it be different
>>>from what we are already doing?  What part of "all of it" are we failing to
>>>store?
>>>
>>
>>Let me illustrate the difference by discussing the drawbacks of this macro:
>>
>>#define STORE_WITH_LOG_AND_UPDATE_RANGE(STORE, VALUE, TYPE, AXIS,	  \
>>				       OUT_ACTION, UNDEF_ACTION)	  \
>>...
>>
>>There is too much going on there.
>>Here is the problem with doing the range adjustment and logarithm upfront.
>>1)  The logarithm is especially egregious.
> 
> 
> I think everybody agrees on this.  At least, I don't recall hearing a
> dissenting opinion.  My request was simply that you leave the existing
> log scale code in place until a general mechanism was ready to replace it.

What do you mean by general?  Able to apply mappings other than log scale?  (I'm sure there are some I can't think of right now.

> But that's not an issue of failing to store input data; it's an issue of
> whether you apply axis scaling upon input or wait until later.

It is.  Wait for later.  With the log scale, STORE_... currently tosses data:

set logscale x
plot "foo" with points
unset logscale x
refresh

will not have all the data that was in the data file "foo".  I argue it should.


> I thought maybe you were proposing that the keyword "every", for example,
> should be ignored during input and only applied later on.  That would be
> a bad idea IMHO because the whole purpose may be to avoid input of 
> the entirety of absurdly large data files. 

That's not what I meant.  Just the records the user says to bring into gnuplot.  If the user discards something intentionally, that's different.


>>You may ask Why run the generated function data through preparation?  
> 
> 
> The CVS code can already do this.
> See "help datafile special" for a description of the '+' pseudofile.

OK, I'm not familiar with that.  I'll look more closely.

Dan