New DLLs

A new set of Silverfrost DLLs is available for beta testing via the following link. This is mainly for the new native %pl winio@ format code. Please make sure that you save backup versions of your existing DLLs before installing the new set.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9e5veknlzz0snuw/newDLLs13.zip?dl=0

Possibly wrong (older) DLLs?

No, these appear to be new. All the files in the Zip except salflibc64.lib have 2017-09-18 as the date.

There is a defunct link to an older Zip with the same name (newDLLS13.zip) in https://forums.silverfrost.com/Forum/Topic/2968, but clicking on that link gives you a 404 popup from Dropbox. Perhaps Paul can edit that post (29 Oct 2016) to indicate that the link is no longer valid.

It is not easy to find the latest newDLLSnn.zip using the forum search feature or using search engines such as Google, Yahoo, etc. Often, one does not know what value of 'nn' to use, and there is no easy way of finding out where one can find the latest set. There is no corresponding problem with SDBG64.ZIP, but that may be so because only the latest release of SDBG64 is provided for sdbg64.exe.

I see no differences

Dan

I guess that you mean that you see no differences in functionality.

I have fixed a few %pl bugs and added %pl[fixed_aspect]. You should at least be able to note that using %pl[fixed_aspect] does not raise an error condition.

The %pl[fixed_aspect] keeps X and Y axis sizes of same ratio and does not cause crashes. Hopefully you figured out how to add scalability for all other elements of the plot. This will be main design shift from mentally sick braindead Simpleplot. Hope after that you will quickly fix all problems mentioned above. Having added few more 2003/2008 features like block/end block will add Silverfrost 1-2 new pro programmers, 99.9999% other will even not notice them. Even more, 99% do not need even Fortran95, happy with Fortran77. Do i need them? May be yes - may be not, the more i use Fortran to more i prefer simplicity, even primitivism. But making killing plotting facility will add thousands mostly novices but all pros will also appreciate it very much. This is like in economics: it's the cheap stuff for masses Walmart which is the #1 not the Nordstrom or Macy's which serve rich.

Much more valuably time will be spent on developing software testing robot which will automatically verify new builds.

Centered X axis caption works OK. But new DLLs completely broke another LOG example (one mentioned in that thread about new PL, no external data needed, with the red and blue symbols)

One more design thing: i do not like very much the new naming winop@ introduced, and now both winio@ and winop@ are used, which causes nothing but confusion. Is it possible to make for new %pl that it will use only winio@ or winop@ ? Even better name exists for it - winpl@

Dan

I confess that I struggle with your belligerence. However, if you will reproduce the sample that now fails then I will aim to take a look at it.

The winop@ routine is provided to make things easier. If you don't like it then you don't need to use it. In fact, the same principle applies to the whole.

Sorry, for the style. Admittedly, I know this Eastern style indeed looks really bad on the West and trying to avoid it. It goes from the argumentative style of the entire scientific community in my home country created in his time by the famous but very rude Nobel Prize physicist Landau. Pity that not many people use new %pl to articulate those several pages of bugs and wishes Western way. In short all those bugs are still there.

/*

[color=green:0e7235cfff] Most striking difference of these styles I first time have experienced on some meeting many years ago when I just came to the West when one guy was defending his poor weak half-cooked PhD. I was like on fire on my chair ready to destroy him but was silent due to my very poor English at that time. All ordeal went shockingly amicably for me and the only objection came from the chair of meeting who also clearly understand that the PhD is total BS with the absurd claims contradicting all known data, conservation laws and common sense. He just asked politely: 'Are you happy with this your result?'. For me this question was like a cultural shock.

On the other half of the world Landau and everyone in similar situation would go on full voice trying to totally bury the person: 'You have really really surprised all us here. All your work is total idiotism and nonsense. Are you in your right mind? You can not read or count 2x2? '

To avoid public humiliation of basically everyone, in such cases Landau usually heard the person before his talk one-to-one and told him what he thinks about him and his work: 'OK, I will allow this garbage to be heard by the people in this seminar but with so much @#$%^ absurd in this work I am now very low opinion about your abilities so you better take the broom and shovel and never do the science again'

Now I hope you understand what was in my head seeing and not believing that pages and pages of found bugs were not fixed, even the most disastrously looking and even few new were made. [/color:0e7235cfff]

Quoted from DanRRight ... famous but very rude Nobel Prize physicist Landau. Pity that not many people use new %pl to articulate those several pages of bugs and wishes Western way.

I remember reading a multi-letter exchange between E.W.Dijkstra and J.W.Backus (both Turing Award winners) in such tones, and an explanation elsewhere that this open, often rude, style was common among Dutch Academics. See, for example, https://github.com/jiahao/backus-dijkstra-letters-1979/blob/master/pdf/all-letters.pdf . Do Web search for 'Backus Dijkstra letters' and 'This guy’s arrogance takes your breath away'.

[In Jest]Perhaps we could add to the FTN95 wish list a request for a %bL control item to provide for Dan's needs. The bL could stand for belligerent Landau' or 'bug List', take your choice. [/Jest]

Dan

Regarding your comment 'But new DLLs completely broke another LOG example', I have found a sample program that matches the description but it runs OK for me. This may be a result the latest fixes (not yet released) or I might have modified your %pl styles to get it to work.

The simplest way forward is for you to try the next version when it comes out.

John, Would be nice if you show the pictures, so I will compare with mine and also this will help Paul to check if these problems were the ones which as he wrote are already fixed

There was a regression in the latest DLL upload (v13) relating to %gr. This has been fixed here...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qbe7moxz1w4psa7/newDLLs14.zip?dl=0

In other respects the 14 is still the same as 13. Do you see these two examples differently? The 12 showed something in the first LOG_LINEAR example. The LOG_LOG is not changed.

   WINAPP 
    MODULE modd 
    USE clrwin 
    INTEGER,PARAMETER::N=65 
    REAL*8 X(N),Y(N),Z(N),T(N), U(N) 
    !..................................... 
    CONTAINS 
    !..................................... 
    INTEGER FUNCTION callb() 
    REAL(2) random 
    DO i=1,N 
      X(i)=i 
      Y(i)=exp(0.35*i) * random() 
      T(i)=Y(i)      
      Z(i)=exp(0.7*i) * (random()-0.003) 
      U(i)=Z(i)
    ENDDO 
    CALL SIMPLEPLOT_REDRAW@ 
    callb = 2 
    END FUNCTION 
    END MODULE 

    !..................................... 
    PROGRAM KKK
    USE modd 

    j=callb() 
    i=winio@('%ww&') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[native]') 
!    CALL winop@('%pl[title='Log_linear@(115,299)']') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[title='Title: ideal log_linear@(-15,10)']') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[x_array]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[scale=log_linear]') 
!    CALL winop@('%pl[y_min=.3]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[y_max=1e7]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[N_GRAPHS=4]') 
    call winop@('%pl[framed]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[tick_len=10]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[axes_pen=4]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[x_axis='Wavelength (A)@(-202,2)']')
    CALL winop@('%pl[y_axis='Intensity (arb.units)@(-20,-222)']') 

 !  i=winio@('%fn[Tahoma]&')  ! Verdana 
    i=winio@('%sf&') 
    i=winio@('%ts&', 2.2d0) 
    i=winio@('%tc&',rgb@(0,0,0)) 
    i=winio@('%bf&') 

    CALL winop@('%pl[width=3]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[colour=red,link=none,symbol=7]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[colour=blue,link=none,symbol=9]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[symbol_size=8.]')
    CALL winop@('%pl[colour=black]') 
    CALL winop@('%pl[colour=green]') 
    i=winio@('%pv%pl&', 700,570, N, X,Y,Z,T,U)  
    i=winio@('%ac[Ctrl+Z]&',callb) 
    i=winio@('%sf%ts&', 1.d0) 
    i=winio@('%ff%cn%^bt[Redraw]%es',callb) 
    END



   use clrwin 
    parameter (N=9) 
    real*8 X(N), Y(N) 
    Data X/0.001,0.01,0.1,1,10, 100,1000,10000,100000/ 
    Data Y/0.0022, 0.011,0.044,0.33,2.2,66,3333,1111,777/ 

    i=winio@('%sf%ts%bf%es&', 2d0) 
    call winop@('%pl[axes_pen=3,width=3,x_axis='X Axis Title',y_axis='Y Axis Title']') 

    call winop@('%pl[fixed_aspect]')
    i=winio@('%ww%pv%pl[native,framed,x_array,scale=log_log,N_GRAPHS=1]', 625,500, n, X, Y) 
    end

John, Please confirm that you run exactly my log_linear code above in your first picture, not modified in any way. Because I saw with dll13 exactly the same garbage only like I show in my first picture with dll14.

Same request to everyone

Right now for me 3/4 of native pl does not work right, out of log_log, log_linear, linear_log and linear only linear works

Thanks. That means Paul did not look yet at my examples.

I intentionally set no manual min limit to emphasize that new %PL sets wrong Y tic marks and labels as opposed to older Simpleplot %pl. The native PL code has to be clever to take right min and max values by itself. Manual set of limits can be used for further beautifications and adjustments.