Re: Interactive Objects, Was: Simple GUI question [message #34909 is a reply to message #34789] |
Fri, 25 April 2003 12:57   |
mvukovic
Messages: 63 Registered: July 1998
|
Member |
|
|
Paul van Delst <paul.vandelst@noaa.gov> wrote in message news:<3EA93481.88D1DE12@noaa.gov>...
> MC wrote:
>>
>> My wish list:
>>
>> 1) Whatever is availale in object graphics is also made available in direct
>> graphics. And leave the choice of style to the individual.
>
> <RANT>
> Hmm. When I use IDL it's typically to look at data. That pretty much it. You know the
> usual stuff, plot, surface, contour, etc. And once I have the first plot up, I want to do
> things like change the scales (e.g. zoom), or rotate the surfaces - you know, play around
> with the numbers. I realised after a bit of a rant the other day that I don't really care
> *how* the images are created/displayed onscreen, I just want them to appear, and I want to
> be able to manipulate them.
>
> Why can't the mechanism behind someone type PLOT on the IDL command line be totally
> transparent? When I plot something I certainly don't care if it was done via direct or
> object graphics, I just want to see the darn plot.
>
> So, I have to admit it sort of confuses me that RSI introduced all this whiz bang object
> graphics stuff, but no "value-added" tools that use them. It's almost like buying a
> mecchano (sp?) set - you get all the structural members and nuts and bolts and tools, but
> if you want anything interesting to play with ya gotta build it yourself. I don't want to
> write a whole bunch of code to do plots, surfaces, contours, whatever in object graphics
> so I can utilise their superior capabilities - that's what we pay so much moola for in the
> first place isn't it?
> </RANT>
>
> Off for more coffee....
>
> paulv
You could use ``live'' tools. I tried, and never liked them very
much. The design, interface, and looks just struck me as clunky. But
then again, maybe I did not give them enough of a chance.
Mirko
|
|
|