On 8/19/07, Fraser Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The default behaviour for viewmat and plot is clearly different but both are > defined as classes and can be used to open as many windows as wanted (see > plot_class.htm). It is easy to name the windows to distinguish them if > wanted.
It's simpler than that, as anyone willing to put together a dozen lines of pd commands can accomplish a lot with plot. But that's not what I'm talking about -- I'm talking about people using the single-line interface to plot (or viewmat, but I did not report any viewmat problems). > The viewmat default is fine for the situation where beginning users want to > use a colour display of some function. However I cannot see any advantage > in changing the default plot class behaviour. In experimenting with a plot > using a script and ctrl-r you could easily end up with a whole series of > windows to close. For me at least, a graphic goes through multiple > refinement steps and I do not want to have the whole sequence as separate > windows. I do not see that plot and viewmat are all that different. Anyways, none of this addresses why I get an error with the new command (identical error with the use command and assigning PForm directly). > > If someone runs open'jzplot' then accidentally types something > > and uses control-Z to undo that typing, they lose the contents of > > the window. This is one keystroke away from losing a significant > > chunk of J -- this seems too easy and of no particular benefit. > > Perhaps J should have a way of discarding undo history. > > This seems to be slightly overdoing the risk. Someone who is opening the > class scripts to modify them should have enough knowledge to know that if > you click on close, then answer Yes to the question if you want the script > modified something will be changed in the system. But people might be using open'jzplot' to study the code with no intention of modifying it. Here, the risk is considerably higher: [1] As the documentation for plot does not cover all issues, examining the code is sometimes the only good way of figuring things out. [2] As people who intend to read the code are not likely to make any intentional changes, the risk of undoing all changes after they accidentally make a change is considerably higher than for users who are intentionally modifying the code. [3] People reading the code to study it would typically be less advanced than those who are prepared to modify it. -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
