Re: Stem update, rough guess.

[Daniel J Sebald]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> On  9-Apr-2007, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
>
> | Well, that's kind of strange then.  The creation of the baseline can't be in
> | stem.m using "line()" because the "set" of
> | 
> | >   h = stem (-10:10);
> | >   set (h, 'basevalue', 3);
> | 
> | comes after the stem.m.  stem.m would have to pass a handle to set.m somehow and
> | that would make no sense.
>
> I don't understand what you mean.  The handle returned by stem is a
> stemseries object that has both basevalue (default == 0) and baseline
> (a line object with xdata set based on the data passed to stem and
> ydata set to the value of basevalue).  If you change the basevalue
> property, the baseline property is also changed.  This is not a unique
> situation as there are other dependent properties.  For example,
> changing xlim implies that xlimmode is changed to "manual".

Basically that is what I meant.  It's "basevalue" that creates the line.  There 
is no way to make this work by stem.m calling line().  That line and its handle 
must be created somewhere else, which is tricky if somehow that handle ends up 
in the list of handles that stem() returns.  Maybe "set (h, 'basevalue', #)" 
returns a handle?  I don't know.  Not important right now.

> Thanks also for sending the ChangeLog entry, though it is best if you
> send that separately instead of as a diff because diffs for ChangeLog
> entries rarely apply automaticlly (there are almost always intervening
> changes that make the context invalid or the date needs to be changed,
> etc.).

Yeah, I know.  OK, when I attach a patch I'll put the ChangeLog entry at the 
very end.

Dan