Mojca Miklavec wrote:
I experience exactly the same problem here both under Windows and Linux. ^M should be replaced by some "newline". If I do that manually, the module works perfectly.
i hate locales
A bit weird request (and not urgent at all since there are other ways to solve this): could "rotate=" be added to \externalfigure once in the distant future? The resulting graphs in postscript are rotated 90 degrees counterclocwise.
hm, i have to think about it
maybe \def\par{; } also works here, i dunny how long gnuplot lines may be
did \def\par{;} work out ok?
The problem is not in \def\par{} I guess. It doesn't have any influence on the way how input lines appear in the file. Even if I redefined the \par and put strange chars in there, it didn't have any influence.
strange, maybe i have a better tex binary
I tried to play with \obeylines a bit, but without success. I managed to get ^E (0x05) instead of ^M in the gnuplot file if I redefined \endchar to be ^^L (if I remember correctly), but just anything else led to errors.
Two not-so-important remarks: 1. \immediate\write\scratchwrite{end} "end" should be changed into "quit" or even better: left out completely since gnuplot exits anyway after executing the script
ok, quit then
2. The default file extension is .plt (instead of gpd; the ending really doesn't matter, but this one is recognized by default when you "open file" from gnuplot)
hm, we don't want to overwrite files, do we?
Some terminals are more ugly than the others. The best idea to specify the terminal is really by placing it manually into \startGNUPLOTinclusion, not by prepending it automatically (as I asked first), since it can have some additional parameters (color, landscape, ...).
it's not prepended now; however, it makes sense to think about it because in the case of mp we need a different treatment
There are also "set terminal pdf" (only in the "latest" versions, perhaps not even included in the binaries), "set terminal png", "set terminal mp", "set terminal latex", ...
Another humble request from me would be to support more than a single terminal:
%%%%% \setupGNUPLOT[terminal=postscript] % should result in \immediate\write\scratchwrite{set output "\bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber.ps"}% ... \convertGNUPLOTgraphic{\bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber}% % perhaps a better name, suggesting ps2pdf conversion
%%%%% \setupGNUPLOT[terminal=pdf] % only recent; should result in
\immediate\write\scratchwrite{set output "\bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber.pdf"}% % no postprocessing/conversion needed.
%%%%% \setupGNUPLOT[terminal=png] % should result in
\immediate\write\scratchwrite{set output "\bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber.png"}% % no postprocessing/conversion needed.
%%%%% \setupGNUPLOT[terminal=mp] % should result in
\immediate\write\scratchwrite{set output "\bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber.mp"}% % plus mpost + mptopdf postprocessing
%%%%% \setupGNUPLOT[terminal=latex] % somewhat more tricky; should result in
\immediate\write\scratchwrite{set output "\bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber.tex"}% % another auxilary file has to be used in this case with \documentclass ... % \begindocument ... \input \bufferprefix gnuplot-\GNUPLOTnumber.tex % and then processed with pdflatex; that's what I currently use: most beautiful results
that's a big list ... why isn't there a context mode?
Thanks a lot, Mojca
PS: Does this module really mean that I have no more excuses for not finishing my report(s) for physics in time? ;)
no, worse, you now can finish it faster see attached file (bottom of file); should be enough to get your reports done Hans