Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Ingo Thies Newsgroups: comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot Subject: Re: Plotting into table with multiple columns Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:04:33 +0200 Lines: 46 Message-ID: <9bsfc2FjgpU1@mid.individual.net> References: <9brre9Fvf3U1@mid.individual.net> <9bs3fiFqhuU1@mid.dfncis.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net JKbgGLPoHIPx6G8652B7pQW+mQil04dqI20EUw/HXY2gOkF6Cn Cancel-Lock: sha1:9qJ20BU/DncrWXLhqvE1AKAhpKg= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 In-Reply-To: <9bs3fiFqhuU1@mid.dfncis.de> Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.graphics.apps.gnuplot:551 Am 2011-08-27 13:41, schrieb Hans-Bernhard Bröker: > There's a huge problem with that idea. There's no particular reason > every dataset should have the same number of samples, much less the same > x positions. Please keep in mind that functions in gnuplot are, > effectively, just internal datafile generators. Well, I don't see the problem, rather I do indeed see a huge particular reason why the datasets should have equal dimensions and x positions in almost all relevant cases: Using a single plot/splot command in the table mode already implies equal samples number for all plotted functions since it is defined by a single "set samples" command before. Furthermore, a single plot/splot command is usually preceded by a single xrange definition. In contrast, I currently do not see any possibility (nor the necessity) to change the number of samples during a plot. For subsequent plot commands (e.g. with replot) the sequential block structure is, of course, useful (although I would prefer to use separate table files instead). Unequal xranges may occur of one lets gnuplot autoscale the x range for all functions individually (I've not tested whether this is possible), but in that case sequential blocks as fall-back option are OK. We are talking here about tabulated data from functions, not from reading existing data files. > As soon as gnuplot actually gets for loops around commands: sure. So far A have found a workaround, although this introduces a separate gnuplot file: The data are plotted in a iteratetly reread file using print sprintf(...). > In the end, you're making the opposite of a very common mistake. Many > people out there abuse spreadsheets as plotting programs. You appear to > be trying to abuse gnuplot as a spreadsheet. Here, the reason is to have an easy way to write out data from gnuplot to give the user the possibility to use them by another software. Of course, the same could also be done by a separate program, but doing it "on the fly" while printing is, in my opionion, more elegant. -- Gruß, Ingo