>Chris, thanks for responding. I appreciate the suggestion of different
>plotting
>method. I don't yet know what the advantage is, but I'll try it. Maybe my head
>will hurt less too.
>
It's the more generic case permitted by DX that any monotonic axis can
become a spatial axis. It achieves the same thing conceptually as you were
doing in Plot, but doesn't offer (or require) the bells and whistles (all
those pesky Options) that Plot does. There is a wider range of Glyph shapes
(including user-provided) vs. the few 2D Plot Markers. As I said, you can
do something like Compute([data1, data2, data3]) to make a 3D space (Plot
is only 2D). It's another thing for your bag of tricks even if you decide
to stick with Plot.
>****
>Right, but what is your result if you plot the field at this step. Does the
>range of your axes cover the out of range value (-9, e+38, or whatever) ? Mine
>doesn't, which make me wonder why these values or not plotted. Since the new
>field contains only the invalids carried over from P2 (but not P1), it
>seems to
>me that the "former" P1 invalids should show up in the plot. Maybe your
>Glyph/autoaxes method as mentioned below works differently than Plot in this
>regard. Or, maybe my invalid value is just too darn high (e+38), that Plot
>ignores it, regardless of its invalidity-tagged status. Dunno. I suppose
>that I
>should forget about it since it's all inconsequential when I follow through
>with the extra steps (experiment #2), but it's bothersome to me.
>
Well, I left something out that I discovered researching this since the
answer I provided solved the problem, but as you say, didn't explain the
mystery.
It appears that if a Field has had "invalid positions" in it, then you
Replace a Component into another Field that has "invalid positions", DX
sometimes does a little number behind your back and creates a "valid box"
Component in the output. I wasn't able to sort out the exact order that
always forced "valid box" to appear in my little test. It seemed to be
distinctly related to the order of operations and the prior presence of
invalids, but I didn't spend enough time on it to fully figure it out.
Maybe someone else reading this knows the whole story...?
I think the "valid box" somehow restrains display of some positions even if
they aren't currently marked invalid. However, "valid box" can only apply
to bounds, not interior invalids, so the range may change but interior
points can't be "invalidated" or "hidden" by "valid box". If you monitor
your input and output Fields with Print("rd", "valid box") you may see this
appear. Let us know.
Chris Pelkie
Vice President/Scientific Visualization Producer
Conceptual Reality Presentations, Inc.
30 West Meadow Drive
Ithaca, NY 14850
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
