[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*Subject*: Re: Plotting double precision*From*: Craig Markwardt <craigmnet(at)cow.physics.wisc.edu>*Date*: 24 Feb 2000 10:34:17 -0600*Newsgroups*: comp.lang.idl-pvwave*Organization*: U. Wisc. Madison Physics -- Compact Objects*References*: <38B4FD5B.D776DF61@NOSPAM.cam.ac.uk> <MPG.131ef4d4cf52a18c989a53@news.frii.com>*Reply-To*: craigmnet(at)cow.physics.wisc.edu*Xref*: news.doit.wisc.edu comp.lang.idl-pvwave:18615

davidf@dfanning.com (David Fanning) writes: > Investigate some of the keywords > that are available for the PLOT command. I would start with > [XYZ]Tickname, [XYZ]TickV, and maybe [XYZ]Tickformat. Yeah, and welcome to another planet of hurt. David is right though. The best solution is to scale your data and then label the axes yourself. Personally, I think it's actually cleaner to scale your data by 10^(-39), and then put that in the "units" of your x/ytitle. I've also encountered the single-precision-plotting problem when I am plotting numbers with X = X0*(1+d) where d is very small. When d/X0 becomes smaller than about 1 in a million, you can see a noticeable staircase effect on the plot, since single precision can't preserve the fidelity. My only solution has been to subtract and rescale the data. Craig -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Craig B. Markwardt, Ph.D. EMAIL: craigmnet@cow.physics.wisc.edu Astrophysics, IDL, Finance, Derivatives | Remove "net" for better response --------------------------------------------------------------------------

**References**:**Plotting double precision***From:*Jacques Basson

**Re: Plotting double precision***From:*David Fanning

- Prev by Date:
**Re: widget_table** - Next by Date:
**Re: width of xyouts?** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Plotting double precision** - Next by thread:
**Re: Plotting double precision** - Index(es):