X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f996b,8ae611e029f9880b X-Google-Attributes: gidf996b,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-11-15 07:35:44 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ab2cc.pppool.DE!not-for-mail From: Josef 'Jupp' Schugt Newsgroups: alt.ascii-art Subject: Re: ASCII-Art function plotting, advice needed... Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:01:01 +0000 Organization: none Lines: 37 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: ab2cc.pppool.de (213.6.178.204) X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037374543 15660715 213.6.178.204 (16 [53633]) X-Orig-Path: jupp.8m.com!news User-Agent: slrn/0.9.7.4 (Linux) Xref: archiver1.google.com alt.ascii-art:20682 On 14 Nov 2002 11:15:50 GMT, Harry Mason wrote: > Things like uptime, load, active connections? You might be better > off with a histogram; it's much easier to represent in ascii. Actually what I want to do *is* drawing histograms. What I am looking for is an improved vertical resolution. Compare these figures that all represent the same constant increase: _ _ _-"| ## _ _ _| | | _-" | ##### _ _ _| | | | | | _-" | ######## _ _ _| | | | | | | | | _-"_________| ########### _|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|_| [...+....1..] [...+....1.] [...+....1....+....2...] In the first case I did use '_' to represent values smaller than 1/3, '-' for values between 1/3 and 2/3 and '"' for values above 2/3 (in units of a single character box). As has been pointed out: the issue is large slopes. The scond one uses '#' for anything above 1/2. The last image shows a 'real' histogramm. You see the difference (both in terms of resolution and width)? The playing around with this problem gave rise to a new signature. I'm pretty sure it will result in some 'Your signature is too long' false alerts ;-) Josef 'Jupp' Schugt -- Web: http://jupp.tux.nu/ __..--""""""--..__ jupp@gmx.de _________________________..--"" There's source ""--..______________ ""--..__ out there! __..--"" ""--..__..--""