On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:51:44 +0200 Evgeny Stambulchik wrote:
> Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> > Setting the tick label format to something different from "general"
> > may, in some cases, cause the zero tick label to be very close, but
> > not exactly equal to zero.
> [...]
> > A patch is attached.
>
> Doesn't the following one-liner suffice?
>
> @@ -785,7 +785,7 @@ reenter:
> wtmaj = ifscale(swc_start + itmaj*stmajor,
> scale);
> } else {
> wtmaj = swc_start + itmaj*stmajor;
> - if (t->tl_format == FORMAT_GENERAL && fabs(wtmaj)
> < 1.0e-6*stmajor) {
> + if (t->t_round == TRUE && fabs(wtmaj) <
> 1.0e-6*stmajor) {
> wtmaj = 0.0;
> }
> }
> Yes, after some reasoning and testing, I agree that your simple and brilliant hack works as intended. The fix I proposed works too, but it's a boring academic-style solution. Hence, I can conclude that the one-line patch you prepared fixes the bug: please apply it to the official 5.1.x branch. Thanks for investigating the issue! :) For the Debian package maintainer: if a new official 5.1.x version cannot be released soon, could you please apply the one-line patch to the present 5.1.x Debian package (I hope Evgeny doesn't mind)? -- http://frx.netsons.org/progs/scripts/refresh-pubring.html Need to refresh your keyring in a piecewise fashion? ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
pgpDBuXeaphVB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
