uOn 2014-10-23 22:26-0700 Greg Jung wrote:
> I've been making plplot libraries with MING-MSYS, 32-bit compile on a
> 64-bit Win7, and testing the resulting examples directory, the "C" and
> "F95" examples run well but the C++ examples don't, unifornly giving me
> the refusal box,
> "the procedu
To Maurice and Andrew:
I think you will be interested both in the history of this issue and
also how I resolved it. If either of you think I screwed up this fix
of Maurice's (1994) fix, please let me know!
Basically Maurice's fix emitted M commands for _every_
state change other than PLSTATE_WIDT
I've been making plplot libraries with MING-MSYS, 32-bit compile on a
64-bit Win7, and testing the resulting examples directory, the "C" and
"F95" examples run well but the C++ examples don't, unifornly giving me
the refusal box,
"the procedure entry point __gxx_personality_sj0 could not be lo
Hi, Alan,
Thanks for the interesting read!
On Oct 23, 2014, at 3:49 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote:
> So back to figuring out this ps device driver issue that apparently
> emits isolated "M" commands that come or go due to sensitive rounding
> issues that only occur in the 14th or later decimal digit o
I have been trying to debug some minor differences that occur between
the results from the (as yet uncommitted) revised Python example 8 and
the corresponding C result. Here is the diff that is occurring for
the -dev psc generated page in example 8 that uses plsurf3dl to show an
elliptical
index
On 2014-10-23 10:23-0700 David MacMahon wrote:
> Hi, Alan,
>
> On Oct 22, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote:
>
>> Today I wanted to discover the author, commit id, and the date for a
>> commit that created a particular line in a file (the restore_cmap1()
>> line in examples/python/xw08.py whic
Hi, Alan,
On Oct 22, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Alan W. Irwin wrote:
> Today I wanted to discover the author, commit id, and the date for a
> commit that created a particular line in a file (the restore_cmap1()
> line in examples/python/xw08.py which has no C counterpart). After a bit of
> searching I di
Well Phil,
If you feel strongly about it then go for c). As I said, it would mirror
what we do for callbacks for some of the other OO languages we support.
Andrew
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:19:17AM +0100, Phil Rosenberg wrote:
> Okay, well, that works then. Although option c is probably only a
I agree that's the best option to keep linkage simple and solve the
problem. I'd not thought about the linkage implications either...
Andrew
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:09:21PM +0100, Phil Rosenberg wrote:
> I agree, so in the absence of any input from Andrew I will go ahead with that
> tomorro
