Hi, On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 09:17:09AM +1300, Paul Murrell wrote: > Peter Dalgaard wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >>Full_Name: Stephen Harker > >>Version: 1.80 > >>OS: linux (Yellow Dog 3.0 on ppc) > >>Submission from: (NULL) (130.194.13.101) > >> > >> > >>In creating a postscript file from a set of data in which the points are > >>plotted > >>using `points()' and lines drawn using `lines()' I have found since > upgrading > >>from R version 1.4? to 1.8 that the two sets do not coinicide > completely. [...] > > [At the current rate, "1.80" would be about 36 years into the future. > > Latest version is 1.8.1.]
:-) > > I can't reproduce this with 1.8.0 on RedHat 8.0. Are you sure it isn't > > your Postscript viewer that is playing tricks on you?? Yes and no: I get the same result in prints from a PostScript file or from files included into a LaTeX document in the case of the original scripts that caused me to try to create a test case. However, this morning having read this comment I tried this test script and I find it generates obvious `errors' using gs 8.11 (in /usr/local/bin) and none obvious using the system gs (7.05 in /usr/bin). I tried printing the file to a HP Laserjet 4MV, 8000N and a Konica 7155 and find it is similar to the gs 7.05 output. This suggests two problems: a problem with gs 8.11 as built on my system and that my test script does not duplicate the problem I thought I was illustrating. In the production scripts I have been using (with a history that goes back to the mid 90's) this occurs in a vary obvious mismatch in the lines() and points() that gets worse as x increases. I had thought that the script submitted duplicated the problem. Now it appears that it does not. For the scripts I was using I get the mismatch on printed postscript and similar(? I did not compare them fully) results with the screen. > I can't reproduce this either, but in trying your script I wonder if you > are not properly "finishing" the postscript plot by calling dev.off > before viewing. If I run your script, then view R-test2.ps without > quitting R, the last few points at the right end of the plot are missing > (because the postscript file is not yet complete). If I then quit R > (the postscript file is completed and closed), the postscript output > looks just like the X11 version. No: in my production versions dev.off() is called. I noticed the missing points you mentioned in the postscript file created. However, I did not worry about it as the error was noticeable in the alignment of the `peaks' and `points' prior to the missing points. I will need to test this further and to find a better way of duplicating the error (if error it is). I will have to try building R 1.8 on another system and test my Rietveld and other x-ray data plotting scripts to see if it matches my current problem. I will contact you when I have more data (useful or otherwise). -- Stephen Harker [EMAIL PROTECTED] School of Physics & Materials Engineering Monash University http://www.ph.adfa.edu.au/s-harker/ Baloney Baffles brains: Eric Frank Russell ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
