octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: desired features for gp backend?


From: Robert T. Short
Subject: Re: desired features for gp backend?
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:57:23 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090402 SeaMonkey/1.1.16

Well, I won't do it.  But that is what I like about octave.  If you want something badly enough, just do it.

Bob

Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:30 PM, Robert T.
Short<address@hidden> wrote:
  
I thought about this some after Ben's question.

I think you are right.  Even though I did like gplot, it is far better to
abstract the plotting from the specific tool.  MATLAB plotting syntax is
occasionally clunky, but it is reasonably straightforward.  To return to
anything gplot specific would be going backwards, not forwards.

A user can always create his own interface if the octave solution doesn't
work.


Plotting has always been a bit of a problem.  Back when we did everything in
FORTRAN (just dated myself!) there were a couple of good subroutine packages
that became fairly standardized and life was good.  Making good plots
conveniently was something I took for granted.  That hasn't really happened
since.

Just my opinion.

Bob

    

Here's an idea: what about bringing the gplot interface back in the
form of an extension package?
(Not that I like it, I've never used it)


  


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]