I agree with Matt, I'd say adapting a 3D plotting library to do 2D as well would be like making a camel serve as a horse! It's just not the same optimisation space.
That said writing a low level plotting driver for PGPLOT or PLPLOT based on OpenGL line drawing primitives to replace X11 would be a very sensible thing. I have never used PLPLOT - what does it lack compared to PGPLOT? Karl On 08/02/2010, at 9:55 PM, Matthew Kenworthy wrote: > FWIW, my vote is against 2D development in OpenGL. > > For very basic immediate results, 2D in OpenGL would be a nice option, but > the axis labeling is completely undeveloped. > > In my experience, it's one of those small problems that promptly becomes a > big problem if you want it to be done properly. In PGPLOT the labeling works > extremely well, and I'd imagine that it's good in PLplot. I can't comment for > certain, as I've not built and played with PLplot in a long time and I'm used > to PGPLOT. > > If people have time and energy for getting universal 2D plotting integrated > with PDL, I'd say that trying to get PGPLOT's licensing concerns sorted out > first (probably not possible...), or maybe making PLplot compile easily for > Linux/Windows/Mac would be more useful than crowbaring OpenGL and TriD into > being a good 2D plotting package. > > Cheers, > > Matt > _______________________________________________ > Perldl mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
