Arjen Markus wrote:
> On 2009-08-05 23:04, Hezekiah M. Carty wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Hazen Babcock wrote:
>
>>> I like this idea/approach. Is there a reason not to reduce it even further?
>>>
>>> plget(const char *, void *)
>>> plset(const char *, void *)
>>>
>>> It seems that ei
Hi, I reenter the discussion that I proposed some days ago
Andrew Ross ha scritto:
> On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 01:14:53PM +0200, Werner Smekal wrote:
>> Hi Arjen,
>>
While I like the API simplification this could provide, I have two
primary concerns:
First, could the first argume
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:04 AM, Hezekiah M.
Carty wrote:
> Second, the void* approach may not translate well to other languages.
> I'm not sure if there is a way to do this in C that would translate
> well to the other PLplot-supported languages though.
I want to contribute a couple of points:
v
On Sat, Aug 08, 2009 at 01:14:53PM +0200, Werner Smekal wrote:
> Hi Arjen,
>
> >>
> >> While I like the API simplification this could provide, I have two
> >> primary concerns:
> >>
> >> First, could the first argument - the field to get/set - be an
> >> enumerated type of some sort? This should
On Aug 8, 2009, at 4:14 AM, Werner Smekal wrote:
> Hi Arjen,
>
>>>
>>> While I like the API simplification this could provide, I have two
>>> primary concerns:
>>>
>>> First, could the first argument - the field to get/set - be an
>>> enumerated type of some sort? This should help catch typos at
Hi Arjen,
>>
>> While I like the API simplification this could provide, I have two
>> primary concerns:
>>
>> First, could the first argument - the field to get/set - be an
>> enumerated type of some sort? This should help catch typos at
>> compile
>> time rather than run time. (PL_LINE_WIDTH r
On 2009-08-05 23:04, Hezekiah M. Carty wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Hazen Babcock wrote:
>> I like this idea/approach. Is there a reason not to reduce it even further?
>>
>> plget(const char *, void *)
>> plset(const char *, void *)
>>
>> It seems that either way the user would have to
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, Hazen Babcock wrote:
> Davide Cesari wrote:
>>> I'm inclined to add at least a function to get the current pen width and
>>> the current plcol0 index.
>>>
>>> Any objections to this expansion of the API? Any objections to adding
>>> getters in the future for all othe
Davide Cesari wrote:
>> I'm inclined to add at least a function to get the current pen width and
>> the current plcol0 index.
>>
>> Any objections to this expansion of the API? Any objections to adding
>> getters in the future for all other PLplot setters? How about the
>> save/unsave feature as
Hazen Babcock ha scritto:
> Hezekiah M. Carty wrote:
>> On Thursday, July 23, 2009, Hazen Babcock wrote:
>>> Should we add a function that returns the current pen width? Or does
>>> such a function already exist?
>>>
>>> How about the index of the current color?
>>>
>>> -Hazen
>> I think that each
Hezekiah M. Carty wrote:
> On Thursday, July 23, 2009, Hazen Babcock wrote:
>> Should we add a function that returns the current pen width? Or does
>> such a function already exist?
>>
>> How about the index of the current color?
>>
>> -Hazen
>
> I think that each of these functions would be usef
On Thursday, July 23, 2009, Hazen Babcock wrote:
>
> Should we add a function that returns the current pen width? Or does
> such a function already exist?
>
> How about the index of the current color?
>
> -Hazen
I think that each of these functions would be useful. I wrote short C
stubs for the
Should we add a function that returns the current pen width? Or does
such a function already exist?
How about the index of the current color?
-Hazen
--
___
Plplot-devel mail
13 matches
Mail list logo
