Re: Deprecating FLTK toolkit

[Ben Abbott]

> On Nov 8, 2017, at 12:35 PM, Pantxo <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Daniel Sebald wrote
>>> Using that same argument, we should also get 
>>> rid of the gnuplot interface.
>> 
>> The overriding reason for gnuplot toolkit is *quality* graphics output.
> 
> How can you speak about *quality* when the output does not even have the
> same aspect ratio as the the expected figure?

Gnuplot does have some attractive features. Especially if some specific tweaks 
are needed. Ex: the plot stream can be captured and then modified manually/

> Daniel Sebald wrote
>> There was a big push years ago to go the route of generating pixel-based 
>> EPS files via Mesa (not utilizing the vector quality of EPS, but instead 
>> doing a pixel translation of the plot and save in an EPS file as a 
>> picture).  
> 
> This is *bullshit*, please check your assertions and provide links!

Actually, there was a push, but I don’t think anything was implemented.

> Daniel Sebald wrote
>> There are indications this isn't sufficient quality, e.g., 
>> this recent discussion:
>> 
>> http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Converting-from-SVG-for-some-printed-output-td4685399.html
> 
> This discussion has nothing to do with raster versus vector graphics.
> 
> Sorry but can provide a few *actual* examples of *useful* (not 10Mb 3D
> graphics that anyone would print to raster formats)  graphics that are
> really better looking when printed with  gnuplot ?

Personally, I think vector is preferred (except for photos and such).

Ben