:-) gnuplot. But I will be glad to use ::Simple so folks can compare. Stand by - traveling atm.
(Mobile) On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:28 AM, Karl Glazebrook <[email protected]> wrote: > Which package did you use for the benchmark plot? :-) > > - Karl > > > On 05/03/2013, at 3:23 PM, Craig DeForest <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Gnuplot doesn't really shine for speed, or even for being particularly >> elegant - though I tried to encapsulate and regularize the horror. To be >> honest, if you're going for speed Prima is a better bet, and in the long run >> its prospects are pretty darned good. That's why we need to make sure it's >> present and advertised in the next few releases, IMHO. >> >> On the other hand, Gnuplot isn't horribly slow either. Here are some Q&D >> benchmarks on my c. 2011 macbook with the fast-pipe patch to gnuplot 4.6. I >> ran the below subroutine in a loop to collect the data. The green >> crosshairs is the performance at a million points (about 2.5 sec); the blue >> crosshairs is the performance at 1 sec (380,000 points). >> >> sub plot_n_points { >> my $n = shift; >> use Time::HiRes q/time/; >> $x = random($n); $y = random($n); >> $w=gpwin(x11); >> $t0 = time; >> $w->plot(with=>'dots',$x,$y); >> $t1 = time; >> return $t1-$t0; >> } >> >> <points-performance.png> >> >> >> On Mar 4, 2013, at 7:58 PM, Karl Glazebrook <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> If GNUplot can plot a million points or a 4096^2 image with a delay < 1s >>> and no memory disaster then that would be fast enough for me. >>> >>> I wish there was a better solution >>> >>> Karl >>> >>> >>> >>> On 04/03/2013, at 2:04 AM, Henning Glawe wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 10:04:45PM +1100, Karl Glazebrook wrote: >>>>> I don't know how 'modern' PLplot is. The documentation still talks about >>>>> Tektronix terminals! >>>>> >>>>> I did some googling, DISLIN seemed the closest but is only semi-frree. >>>>> >>>>> In astronomy people really only use pgplot at the c/f77 level. (At a >>>>> higher level they use language specific graphics, e.g. IDL, IRAF, Python, >>>>> sm (!), gnuplot, MMA). >>>>> >>>>> What about other scientific fields? What do people you know use? >>>> >>>> In my field (computational quantum physics/chemistry), computation and >>>> visualization are usually treated separately. Typically, the actual >>>> numerical simulations are very heavy (taking CPU-days or even CPU-weeks on >>>> current HPC-Clusters). >>>> The visualization is performed in a separate step, where different >>>> "classes" >>>> of tools are employed: >>>> * Special purpuse tools for molecule/crystal visualization, which show: >>>> - crystal structures >>>> - densities either on cutting planes or as equipotential surfaces >>>> Tools belonging to this class are: >>>> - xcrysden http://www.xcrysden.org/ >>>> - v-sim http://www-drfmc.cea.fr/L_Sim/V_Sim/index.en.html >>>> * General-purpose plotting tools with a focus on 2D-visualization: >>>> - gnuplot http://gnuplot.sourceforge.net/ >>>> - grace http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/Grace/ >>>> * General-purpose plotting tools with more focus on 3D-visualization: >>>> - OpenDX http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_OpenDX >>>> (Official website seems to be down) >>>> Learning curve is quite steep, interface is a bit awkward to use (for >>>> modern standards) >>>> - paraview http://www.paraview.org/ >>>> Easier to use than OpenDX; very powerful visualization tool, integrated >>>> python scripting support for >>>> - sources (data generation) >>>> - filters (data processing) >>>> - general-purpose macros >>>> >>>>> Looks dismal. Perhaps the moral is people who put significant effort in >>>>> to visuals tend to go commercial? >>>> >>>> I don't think so. You can get quite good results out of free >>>> visualization tools, altough sometimes you may have to tweak the settings a >>>> bit. One very good example for this is gnuplot; the default settings have >>>> not >>>> changed much in the past 20 years (think backwards compatibility), but with >>>> some modifications in your gnuplot scripts, plots may look a lot more >>>> attractive. This is one of the websites showing how to do this: >>>> http://www.gnuplotting.org >>>> >>>> For paraview, there are some good examples in the image gallery: >>>> http://www.paraview.org/paraview/project/imagegallery.php >>>> >>>> >>>> Maybe we have to go back to the question what _kind_ of visualization >>>> support >>>> we need to have available directly within PDL. >>>> >>>> In my opinion, a very simple plotting interface used mainly for >>>> debugging/development is enough. >>>> For anything beyond this, there are really good plotting tools available >>>> also >>>> as free software, we just need to be able to export data in a format >>>> readable >>>> by them. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> c u >>>> henning >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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
