Re: Time/date autoticking --- showstopper?

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Daniel J Sebald wrote:

> You didn't get much feedback on this one.  I think it is because it is 
> somewhat obsure for most to follow without working with it closely.  

That's why I suggested to go play with it a bit --- the shortcomings
are pretty obvious once you start looking for them.

But with Petr on vacation, and Ethan occupied with the generalization of
postscript enhanced to other terminals, it looks like I'll have to do this
on my own.

I'll just check in my current fix then.  It works different from the one
suggested by the bug's original reporter, in several ways.

> But for
> 
>     p [-10 : 36*60] x
> 
> the scale seems to jump to the hourly dynamic range, or mode, or 
> whatever you want to call it.  

Exactly that's the problem.  To be more precise, timelevel[FIRST_Y_AXIS] 
is TIMELEVEL_HOURS in this case, and that's where the proverbial brown 
stuff hits the fan.  time_tic_just interprets this fact as meaning that 
*all* tics have to lie on integer multiples of hours, whereas 
quantize_time_tics wants it to mean that the tic interval is 1/12th of an 
hour.

> that there should be 6 minor tics between major tics, but only the first 
> two minor tics are displayed.  I would say this one is a bug of the typo 
> kind, i.e., and "oops, didn't mean to type that" sort of thing, rather 
> than a conceptual thoughto.

Trust me, it is a "thoughto" alright. 

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.