Francesco Poli wrote:
Setting the tick label format to something different from "general" may,
in some cases, cause the zero tick label to be very close, but not
exactly equal to zero.
[...]
A patch is attached.
Doesn't the following one-liner suffice?
@@ -785,7 +785,7 @@ reenter:
wtmaj = ifscale(swc_start + itmaj*stmajor, scale);
} else {
wtmaj = swc_start + itmaj*stmajor;
- if (t->tl_format == FORMAT_GENERAL && fabs(wtmaj) <
1.0e-6*stmajor) {
+ if (t->t_round == TRUE && fabs(wtmaj) <
1.0e-6*stmajor) {
wtmaj = 0.0;
}
}
As to FORMAT_GENERAL, I cannot recall why I thought it was needed to be
checked for specifically; let's hope it's ok...
Regards,
Evgeny
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
