Aw: Re: changes to graphics.cc and subplot.m

[Stefan Mahr]

>>>>>>>> oops!  The test only fails for me the 1st time it is run, and only 
>>>>>>>> because the axes handles are in the wrong order.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Ben
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It's weird. With your test script I get the same results as you.
>>>>>>> However, the resulting output still has different y-axis size for both
>>>>>>> plots.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If I copy-paste your example block-wise in interactive mode, I get more
>>>>>>> errors. Could it be some kind of timing problem?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The extra errors are because the test aborts after the first error.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----------
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> graphics_toolkit fltk
>>>>>>> close all
>>>>>>> hf = figure (gcf (), "__graphics_toolkit__", "fltk", "visible", "on");
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> subplot(2,1,1); plot(rand(10,1)); subplot(2,1,2); plot(rand(10,1))
>>>>>>> hax = findall (gcf (), "type", "axes");
>>>>>>> positions = cell2mat (get (hax, "position"));
>>>>>>> outerpositions = cell2mat (get (hax, "outerposition"));
>>>>>>> looseinsets = cell2mat (get (hax, "looseinset"));
>>>>>>> tightinsets = cell2mat (get (hax, "tightinset"));
>>>>>>> close all
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> subplot(2,1,1); plot(rand(10,1)); subplot(2,1,2); plot(rand(10,1))
>>>>>>> hax = findall (gcf (), "type", "axes");
>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "position")), positions, 0.001)
>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "outerposition")), outerpositions, 0.001)
>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "looseinset")), looseinsets, 0.001)
>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "tightinset")), tightinsets, 0.001)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "position")), positions, 0.001)
>>>>>>> error: assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "position")),positions,0.001) 
>>>>>>> expected
>>>>>>> 0.13000   0.58384   0.77500   0.32733
>>>>>>> 0.13000   0.12384   0.77500   0.32733
>>>>>>> but got
>>>>>>> 0.13000   0.60122   0.77500   0.30994
>>>>>>> 0.13000   0.18964   0.77500   0.26152
>>>>>>> maximum absolute error 0.0658047 exceeds tolerance 0.001
>>>>>>> error: called from:
>>>>>>> error:   /usr/share/octave/3.7.5/m/testfun/assert.m at line 235, column 
>>>>>>> 5
>>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "outerposition")), outerpositions, 0.001)
>>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "looseinset")), looseinsets, 0.001)
>>>>>>>> assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "tightinset")), tightinsets, 0.001)
>>>>>>> error: assert (cell2mat (get (hax, "tightinset")),tightinsets,0.001)
>>>>>>> expected
>>>>>>> 0.042857   0.013122   0.000000   0.026316
>>>>>>> 0.042857   0.013199   0.000000   0.026316
>>>>>>> but got
>>>>>>> 0.04286   0.09122   0.00000   0.01696
>>>>>>> 0.04286   0.13964   0.00000   0.00000
>>>>>>> maximum absolute error 0.126443 exceeds tolerance 0.001
>>>>>>> error: called from:
>>>>>> error:   /usr/share/octave/3.7.5/m/testfun/assert.m at line 235, column 5
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The second error is the one I hoped to catch.  I'll work in fixing the 
>>>>>> test.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ben
>>>>> 
>>>>> Does the attached version isolate the second error?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ben
>>>> 
>>>> It's not related to the test itself, but line
>>>> hf = figure (gcf (), "__graphics_toolkit__", "fltk", "visible", "on");
>>>> fails for me. I need to add 'graphics_toolkit fltk' in the first line to 
>>>> make it work.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If the test in run in script mode, it always pass. While testing Rik's 
>>>> plot issue I realized, that subplot is not neccessary for catching the 
>>>> y-axis bug. The optical difference is not as big as with subplot, so I 
>>>> overlooked it in the past. With attached patch the bug is reproducable in 
>>>> script mode. Please note the 'sleep(2)' after the plot command. Without 
>>>> this sleep, the test pass without error.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Stefan
>>> 
>>> Stefan / Dimitri / others,
>>> 
>>> I'm still hoping to add some tests that demonstrate the problem.
>>> 
>>> Does running this script produce one expected failure and 1 passing test?
>>> 
>>> Ben
>>> 
>> 
>> No, since it's inverted. The first test passes, the second fails.
>> 
>> However, it's still not 100% sure:
>> 
>> octave-cli:44> test stefan; test stefan
>> [...]
>> PASSES 2 out of 2 tests (1 expected failure)
>> PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
>> 
>> When calling 'test stefan' twice in one command line, the second run passes 
>> both tests. It also happens when you copy&paste
>> 
>> test stefan
>> test stefan
>> 
>> to command line:
>> 
>> octave-cli:68> test stefan
>> [...]
>> PASSES 2 out of 2 tests (1 expected failure)
>> octave-cli:69> test stefan
>> PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
>> octave-cli:70> test stefan
>> PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
>> 
>> If you wait until the plot window is closed before starting new test, you 
>> get the expected failure.
>> 
>> Stefan
>
> Stefan, can I impose on you to modify the tests so that they give the result 
> we desire (i.e. one failure and then a passing test)?
> 
> Ben
> 
> 

I wish I could.

 octave-cli:19> for i=1:10, stefan; end
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests (1 expected failure)
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests (1 expected failure)
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests (1 expected failure)
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests
 PASSES 2 out of 2 tests


Stefan

stefan.m
Description: Text Data