|
forums.silverfrost.com Welcome to the Silverfrost forums
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 7925 Location: Salford, UK
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
John
I think that there was a point where the beta DLLs got out of step with the last full release of FTN95. You may need to use the DLLs downloaded via a link in the current thread about %PL. If you can wait a little while, a full release is expected soon when hopefully everything will be sorted out. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008 Posts: 2816 Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2017 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John-Silver, I am sure Paul knows himself many these defects even without our mentioning. This new %pl is just in beta state, or, better say, even pre-beta. Just first attempts.
I will tell you based on my experience with 2D graphics, that it is actually not easy to make this graphics stuff look perfect from first attempts. It took me many years just to make it look not like utter ugly cr#p. And based on the same experience i may say even more: there were may be just couple run-time graphics packages which you can embed into your running codes in the entire history of computing which make regular XY plots look not like a cr#p.
I just hope to shorten potentially long try and fail attempts if we will show the best examples to follow and warn to avoid dangerous minefields. One of these fields is to use pixels as plot units. And i afraid this already took place with first version of new %pl. The plot design must be based on the entire X and Y dimensions of the plot and everything else must be based on percentage from these X and Y sizes (besides may be axis and line sizes which good to measure in pixels). That will allow to create scalable size graphs where the plots will look perfect with any magnification |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John-Silver
Joined: 30 Jul 2013 Posts: 1520 Location: Aerospace Valley
|
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't disagree with you about it being beta work Dan, but it seemed like me to be 2 steps forward, 1 step back whereas , as you yourself said, it seems like a relatively little effort to sort out the immediate gliches. I even doffed my cap at the effort put in so far by Paul & his team.
I guess they have a planned workload though. It would be nice to have some idea from time to time what was being planned so that ideas from the cmmunity could be aired up-front instead of 'on the job' implementation, with it's obvous restrictions on adaprìting to real-time changes of direction.
Lack of log plots, even some with glitches/restrictions is a big hit on a large part of my need.
The aim of my comments were to hopefully persuade Paul not to simply drop log plots completely from the version in the next release.
You make some good points about scaling and making the ploting procedure fit with that, although scaling is fundamental, at the end of the day though it comes down to pixels as in all CG.
SVG methods are obviously the way to go ideally but the development would be longer. We both know the restrictions often imposed by management in a company and I guess Paul is no different from being under constant modern pressures to deliver x2 times the work in half the time ! .... at half the cost to boot !
Your point about having good aims (examples of plots users want/need) to follow is another good one. A dedicated specific post where users could post such ideas of their needs would be a good one and I'm sure a good point of reference for Paul & his team. This post is good for recording bugs/problems withe implementation of native&PL but a seperate one would maybe be useful purely for 'storing' examples of plots people use (especially the more 'exotic' plots with multiple y-axes, etc .....). A further seperate one for eventual 3-D plots ideas and brainstorming too) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John-Silver
Joined: 30 Jul 2013 Posts: 1520 Location: Aerospace Valley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just spotted that in the on-line documentation here:
http://silverfrost.com/ftn95-help/devel/x64_compiler.aspx
is stated:
Quote: | 64-bit ClearWin+ does not currently support SIMPLEPLOT (%pl) |
clearly this is not up to date (even though the current implementation is bet).
Maybe the relevant wording could be updated to reflect the presence of a beta status, just for those not au fait with this post.
A link to this post might also be a good idea until native %pl reaches release status ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|