RE: [Plplot-devel] java bug which showed up for x01 example in single-precision is now fixed.

[Geoffrey F. <fu...@ga...>]

Just winking in for a moment, in an otherwise massively out of control
week.

Alan W. Irwin writes:
 > On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Alan W. Irwin wrote:
 > 
 > > There does seem to be one java bug for the single-precison back end which
 > > needs further investigation. For the double-precision back end, x01 gives
 > > gives identical good results to the double-precision C example, but for the
 > > single-precision back end the java example badly screws up the placement of
 > > the line symbols.
 > 
 > I found the bug in javabind.c and fixed it in CVS.  

Thanks.

 > x01 for java now gives identical results to x01c regardless of
 > whether single-precision or double-precison is configured for the
 > PLplot back end.

Thanks for noticing the problem, and for all th testing you have been doing.

 > (I also inadvertently changed back the CVS version of PLStream.c so
 > it refers to the single-precision library, but I will probably
 > leave that as is until Geoffrey fixes the configuration.)

Hopefully what I have just committed will be adequate.  Let me know
how it serves you.

 > So aside from that one configuration issue, I am happy with the java
 > frontend codebase we now have both for single and double precision.
 > 
 > To follow up on this nice achievement lead by Geoffrey, I will concentrate
 > on implementing x09, x12, x13, x15, x16, and x18 in that order.  Once
 > Geoffrey has done the additional API binding required by those examples, the
 > java front end will actually be better off than the current python front end
 > (which does not have the 15th example implemented yet and which currently
 > segfaults for the 9th example).

Also, I think the java binding is probably the only one that does the
automatic float<-->double conversion thing.  I'm undecided about
whether that is something we want in a compiled binding like C++, but
I am pretty sure we /do/ want this kind of functionality for the
script language bindings.  Not that "script language" is an accurate
characterization of java, but you know what I mean.  OTOH, I haven't
ever looked deeply at the Perl or Octave work, so perhaps there is
coolness there that I don't even know about.

Anyway, lest anyone get consumed by anticipation, there is still a
/lot/ of work to do on the Java binding.  Many many API function
wrappers remain to be implemented.

But we're certainly getting there, and thanks again to Alan for
helping out.

-- 
Geoffrey Furnish         fu...@ga...