Re: Reviving compare_plot_demos

[Ben Abbott]

On Jun 21, 2014, at 12:14 PM, Rik <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 06/21/2014 09:00 AM, address@hidden wrote:
>> Message: 7
>> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 11:36:31 +0200
>> From: Andreas Weber <address@hidden>
>> To: Octave Maintainers <address@hidden>
>> Subject: revive compare_plot_demos
>> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
>> 
>> Dear maintainers,
>> 
>> due to the many bug reports related to printing plots and regressions in
>> plotting demos I would like to revive
>> http://octave.sourceforge.net/compare_plots/
>> 
>> Here is the initial posting from S?ren:
>> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Comparing-plots-to-Matlab-td3068200.html
>> 
>> And this is the last proposed patch from Ben I could found (which was,
>> to my knowledge, never applied):
>> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/demo-syntax-and-using-dump-demos-to-compare-to-ML-tp4316479p4319733.html
>> 
>> Because it's difficult to compare the plots automatically I think a cool
>> feature would be a rating function where users can give points for each
>> gnuplot, fltk (and qt in the future) and submit it at the end. For
>> example 10 points is as good as or even better as matlab, 0 points is
>> absolutely useless or an empty plot.
>> 
>> What do you think?
> 
> I think this is a very good idea, and was getting ready to propose this
> myself.  The development branch has seen a lot of work cleaning up the
> OpenGL renderer as well as the m-files for plotting.  We need a new
> baseline to see how we are doing.

I like the idea as well.  Perhaps a new script can be committed that complies 
all demos into a pdf (one pdf for each supported toolkit?) ?

Ben