Werner Smekal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I made the decision to copy the whole (actually the part of the buffer > which contains information) buffer to a new memory buffer. Reason is, > that there is no obligation to close the stream right after you saved > the file. If the programmer decides to work on with both streams, both > streams write into the same buffer. Since nowadays memory is not that > problem anymore, I decided to copy the buffer. I couldn't test it > actually since on Windows there was no segmentation fault, but at least > the new version still compiles and runs on Windows. Could anybody > (Torquil?) test it, if the changes solve the problems?
As the author of the memory buffer version, I tried to implement the functionality of the file buffer version. That said, I think making a copy of the buffer is the best way to go forward. The purpose of the plcpstrm call was to copy a buffer so that it could be rendered by a different device (for example to generate a postscript output from a plot that is being displayed). The advantage to maintaining one plot buffer is to have the capability to maintain the same plot on two different output devices simultaneously. The name plcpstrm, in my opinion, implies making a copy of the current state and not linking the two plots. If we do want to maintain a plot buffer that is linked to multiple device, perhaps a new API call should be implemented. -jd ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Plplot-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plplot-devel
