Actually,
We can still have still three options: gnuplot_preamble, gnuplot_prefix,
gnuplot_suffix. And they appears in the generated gnuplot code in the
following order:
gnuplot_preamble
gnuplot_prefix
Maxima auto generated gnuplot code
gnuplot_suffix
gnuplot_prefix is not an alias of gnuplot_preamble. It appears after it.
By using this three options, we can achieve more features to support hybrid
programming with gnuplot in the future.
For example, we can automatically replace maxima variable names to their
values in gnuplot_prefix and gnuplot_suffix but NOT in gnuplot_preamble.
gnuplot_preamble is only used for low level gnuplot configuration, such as
output term, file name, etc.
while gnuplot_prefix and gnuplot_suffix are used for real logic gnuplot
program code, including functions, tics etc.
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Jaime Villate <villate at fe.up.pt> wrote:
> On 17-12-2013 20:37, Robert Dodier wrote:
>
>> A few comments about new plotting options.
>>
>> * rem_plot_option: let's spell out "remove".
>>
> OK, I have nothing against it.
>
>
>
>> * gnuplot_prefix / gnuplot_preamble: I gather that these two are the
>> same. I'm implacably opposed to aliases, as they are nothing but a
>> source of trouble. Let's nuke one or the other, I don't care which.
>>
>
> There has been some discussion about this.
> gnuplot_preamble cannot be nuked, because wxplot will break. A new option
> was requested
> that would add commands after the commands set by plot2d/3d and not after.
> That leave us with
> the following possibilities: gnuplot_preamble/gnuplot_postamble, or
> gnuplot_preamble/gnuplot_suffix.
> Can you please vote on any of these two or suggest something else?
>
> * samexy, samexyz, yxratio, maybe others: can we write these with an
>> underscore to separate distinct semantic bits, e.g., same_xy,
>> same_xyz, yx_ratio. Especially for speakers of languages other than
>> English, it is hard to see where to break the semantic units (but
>> it's hard enough for native speakers too).
>>
>> OK, I agree. How about logx and logy? Do you think they should also
> become log_x and log_y?
>
> Regards,
> Jaime
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>