|
From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2012-09-23 03:48:24
|
On 09/22/2012 06:14 PM, gn...@di... wrote: > Hi all. > > I tackled the long-standing issue of the x11 terminal not respecting the > requested plot aspect ratio. There have been many bugs about this on the > tracker. The main one appears to be > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=3331162&group_id=2055&atid=102055 > > I have a branch that handles this issue similar to the way the wxt > terminal does: > > - inboard driver computes a particular x,y scale factors > - terminal ALWAYS respects this aspect ratio > - resizing the window does NOT touch the aspect ratio > - a replot is required to re-compute the scale factors > > Similar to the qt terminal, I added a replot-on-resize option to make > things 'just work', at the expense of some extra cpu cycles. > > The code works for my test cases, but I had to touch enough stuff to > make me concerned about cases that I missed. How are such changes > tested, usually? I didn't see a test suite. > > The code is in a git repo at > > https://github.com/dkogan/gnuplot > > I'm also attaching a patch for a diff from the latest code in CVS, as > of Sep 2012. > > As an aside, the main reason I'm touching the x11 terminal at all > (instead of just moving to wxt or qt) is that it appears to be much > faster than the newer terminals. Particularly, if you have a 3d plot > with lots of points, interactively rotating the data is noticeably much > snappier with x11. Is this expected? I'm not sure many of us here know what to expect given limited experience with Qt. I thought I had read there is somewhere that Qt can be tweaked to refresh at a faster rate. I suspect too that Qt terminal is doing much more internally, such as anti-aliasing and/or alpha scaling. X11 terminal is really efficient code but has limited features on account of the limited nature of X terminals. Anyway, I think X11 is still something good to have around. Some systems might not have Qt installed for whatever reason. Dan |