Re: gnuplot in Octave review

[Sergei Steshenko]

--- On Tue, 2/10/09, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden> wrote:

> From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: gnuplot in Octave review
> To: "Petr Mikulik" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2009, 4:17 PM
> 2009/2/10 Petr Mikulik <address@hidden>:
> > "Octave by default uses the curiously-named
> gnuplot (it has nothing to do
> > with the GNU project)"
> >
> > Your review is about Octave, so why do you put this
> funny personal opinion
> > into this text?
> 
> There's nothing opinionated about it except
> "curiously named", but
> maybe you think it's natural to use "gnu" for
> free software that
> doesn't have anything to with GNU. Many other people,
> however, often
> believe gnuplot has something to do with GNU.
> 
> > Gnuplot is not a tool for 3D scene modelling. It has
> indeed some other
> > limitations. However, many properties changed in
> recent years. Which
> > "complex 3d plotting" does not it support?
> Can you give examples? You are
> > welcome to contribute to both sides, Octave as well as
> gnuplot.
> 
> Unless it's changed recently, gnuplot doesn't do
> lighting and
> shading... as I recall, it also had problems, with rending
> multiple 3d
> surfaces and which surface should be visible and which not,
> but maybe
> that has changed recently too. It also seems a little slow
> to me when
> trying to render surfaces at high resolution (e.g. 100x100
> meshgrid),
> especially noticeable when trying to rotate said surface.
> 
> Gnuplot's limitations are obvious in various ways, and
> the gradual
> move to the OpenGL backend is a generalised acknowledgment
> of this.
> Not to mention that its output is ugly compared to OpenGL:
> 
>     
> http://platinum.linux.pl/~jordi/piccies/gnuplot-vs-octaviz.png
> 
> Something I would like some day in Octave (I know, I know,
> "show us
> the code") is something like Matlab's movie-making
> abilities. I think
> gnuplot is a bit limited for that purpose. Right now I
> generate
> individual frames and stitch them together with mplayer or
> ffmpeg.
> Perhaps if I can assume a dependency on ffmpeg or mplayer,
> I could be
> able to code up m-files that did movies in Octave as in
> Matlab.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with gnuplot other than its funny
> name and that
> it doesn't do everything we want it to do. It's
> otherwise a fine piece
> of software. :-)
> 
> - Jordi G. H.
> _______________________________________________


Whatever 'gnuplot' limitations are it has one _great_ advantage - it's a
separate process.

I once had 200+ 'gnuplot' windows created by just one 'octave' session,
cumulative memory consumption of the session + the windows was much more that 
4GB (architectural limit of a 32 bits system), and it was on a
32 bits system.

So, I think it would be nice to have in the future an equally robust solution.

I.e. I am in favor of plotting system implemented as separate processes.

Jordi, if you agree with my praise for the present 'octave' + 'gnuplot'
combination, you are more than welcome to add it to your review.

Regards,
  Sergei.