>>>>> "James" == James Amundson <amundson@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
James> On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 17:27, Raymond Toy wrote:
James> 4) Add documentation for new plotting routines.
James> -I was somehow convinced that I had already done this, but
James> obviously I have not. Most of the necessary information is on the demo
James> web page I created.
>>
>> Would be nice if the log plots could do something than setting the
>> gnuplot preamble string.
James> I'm not sure what you meant. Did you mean that you would like to add a
James> log scale option to plot? We could do that, but I'm afraid of the
James> slippery slope -- there are a million options available through the
James> gnuplot_preamble command. If we start making some of them real plot
James> options, where do we stop? I'm more comfortable with the level of
James> wrapping we have right now: minimal.
First, let me apologize. I didn't know you had made such changes.
I think it would be nice to have, say, logx, logy, logxy options for
the user instead of using gnuplot_preamble. These are common things
to want to do, even if we don't have gnuplot.
I would not, of course, make all things accessible as options, but
common ones should be. Maybe line-style or point-style or something
like that would be useful.
James> Oh, maybe not. I've had a fever off and on for a week. It may be
James> clouding my judgment. The plan for the next release was to do downcasing
James> and nothing else. The patches will be hard to apply after downcasing. I
James> have been privately debating about when to apply these patches for days.
James> My mind can still be changed.
It's seem reasonable to me to release 5.9.1 now. Then apply the
mega-patch, wait a bit, then downcase everything.
Ray