Re: Problems with @Figure, @Verbatim and more

[David Kuehling]

>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Kingston <address@hidden> writes:

>> I also wondered, whether there is an equivalent for "N @Wide @Scale"
>> that would fit something into a specified vertical space, which would
>> sometimes be comfortable for pictures.

> You could try

>     -90 @Rotate N @Wide @Scale 90 @Rotate { whatever }

I'll try that.  I thought that width and height handling would somehow
be symmetric, but this doesn't seem to be the case.  As I said, I'll
have another look at the design description.

>> Also, I tried @Perl and @Ruby instead of @Verbatim, which somehow
>> worked, but the lines would end up concatenated, with the whole
>> source being block-formatted.

> This sounds like a side-effect of the use of @PP, which puts whatever
> follows it into a paragraph.  This won't happen if you use

>     @IndentedDisplay @Ruby { ... }

This works, but I get very strange results for perl.  That's maybe due
to "incompatability" of my document with the perl typesetting script.
Unfortunately @Ruby doesn't suffice to properly display Octave-scripts.
I think I'll use @Verbatim for now, maybe adding some filter-support, if
I can find the time.

> I can't really comment on your problems with @Figure, I'd have to look
> at it in detail.  But I'd echo the suggestion of someone else to turn
> page optimization off.  In that case the algorithm for placing figures
> is very simple, it just takes each figure as it comes to it and places
> it where @Location says, unless it doesn't fit there, in which case it
> tries to find a similar location later in the sequence of pages.  It
> should really be very predictable.  If you are convinced that there is
> something wrong with long sequences of figures, package up a small
> example and post it and I'll take a look at it.

I wasn't able to adjust my last document to reproduce the problems that
I encountered while working at it.  Tomorrow I'll have another try with
an older document with larger graphics...

> Jeff Kingston

> ps I mean 90d, not 90.  I am not sure that a sequence of figures all
> with @Location { Display } is the right way to go typographically.  

I aggree, for "usual" documents I'm very satisfied with automatic float
placement.  But sometimes, with very large graphics, within in documents
that are something like homework results, I want to make sure that
graphics won't be postponed for too many pages, where they would lie
very out-of-context.

Thanks for your help,

David
-- 
GnuPG public key: http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~dvdkhlng/dk.gpg
Fingerprint: B17A DC95 D293 657B 4205  D016 7DEF 5323 C174 7D40