From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2004-07-23 22:15:27
|
Ethan Merritt wrote: >On Friday 23 July 2004 12:09 pm, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > > >>It would be nice to be able to control the "max no cols" vs. "max no >>row" independent of the autoplacement. As it stands, there is no >>"above" autoplacement, only "below"; and there is the using up space >>issue I've mentioned. >> >> > >I quite agree with you that the current setup has lots of problems. >I thought a bit about trying to introduce explicit code to control the >number of rows and columns. Then I looked at the code and shuddered. > Just a bit disorganized, I think. Not too bad. >Then I thought some more and decided that a better goal was to >work toward generalizing the setup in a different way. I started by >moving all the key-specific data into a single structure, with the idea >that one could then support multiple keys. > I thought of the multiple keys thing too. Not how to do it, but the possibility of doing it. > Rather than trying to >control the column layout with a key, you would instead assign >half the plots, say, to one key box and the other half to a second >key box. Each box could be separately positioned in x and y. >It would look to the user something like > > set key 1 title "First Half" at x1, y1 > set key 2 title "The Rest" at x2, y2 > plot 'data' u 1:2 key 1 title "whatever, \ > '' u 1:3 key 2 title "whatever" > >and so on. > >I never got any further than that in coding, but anyway that's my >suggestion as to what we might aim for. > You are directing, then, which key the signal should go into. I like that. That sort of fits the general philosophy of gnuplot. Walking across town, I've sort of concluded that keywords "horizontal/vertical" would be more appropriate than "maxcols/maxrows". I'll attempt a simple patch to introduce these keywords. Not a full implementation, but something that at least allows me to manually position a horizontal key so I can finish the plot I'm after. Dan |