Re: Configuration options [was: Policy question - to PM3D or not to PM3D?]

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

Petr Mikulik wrote:
>>> Candidates for being always in gnuplot are:
>>
>>
>>> #define EAM_DATASTRINGS 1
>>> #define EAM_HISTOGRAMS 1
>>> #define GP_MACROS 1
>>> #define GP_STRING_VARS 2
>>> #define GP_FIT_ERRVARS 1
>>> #define PM3D 1
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday 13 July 2005 08:17 am, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
>>
>>>
[...]
>> In particular PM3D is now so integral to many new features that I
>> think it would make no sense for anyone to upgrade past version 4.0
>> and *not* include PM3D.  Why go out of our way to support a
>> combination of options that doesn't make any sense?
>>
>> So yes, I think the PM3D code should be made unconditional.
> 
> 
> I will do this change within one week if there is no really strong 
> objection.

Do you mean strip out all the PM3D flags?  I'm OK with that.  It does add a little bit, but I think as time goes on it might be condensed slightly through clean up.  Also, Gnuplot doesn't seem to be too bloated compared to other programs.  Plotting a sufficiently large plot will use up more memory than the executable anyway.

But please have a look at the patch for more versatile key placement before doing the mods because I'm guessing it would cause some hunks to fail.

After that, I'd propose making the BINARY_DATA_FILE permanent too.  It would unify the code flow for ASCII, binary, 2D, 3D.  I can put together a patch for that down the road.

Dan